logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.03.31 2016나85264
구상금 등
Text

1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance is revoked.

2. The plaintiff's claim against the defendant is all dismissed.

3.

Reasons

Basic Facts

The court's explanation on this part is the same as the entry of "1. Basic Facts" in the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it is acceptable to accept this part in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the

According to the above facts, at the time of entering into the instant sales contract on February 5, 2016, the instant guarantee insurance contract was already concluded, which serves as the basis for the Plaintiff’s claim for reimbursement against co-defendant C at the first instance trial, and the Defendant Company, as the primary debtor, did not pay the price for the goods, claimed insurance money to the Plaintiff by the non-party Company, and concluded the instant sales contract between them, there was a claim for preservation of the obligee’s right of revocation.

According to the facts on the establishment of fraudulent act, C concluded a sales contract with the Defendant without any specific property other than the instant real estate and disposed of the instant real estate.

As such, the act of selling real estate, which is the only property of the debtor, and replacing it with money which is easily consumed by the debtor constitutes a fraudulent act, barring special circumstances, and the debtor's intent to commit suicide is presumed. Therefore, the burden of proving that the purchaser or the transferor did not

(See Supreme Court Decision 9Da2515 delivered on April 9, 199, etc.). As to the judgment on the Defendant’s bona fide objection, the Defendant did not know C prior to the instant sales contract, and did not hear all the possibility of the instant guarantee insurance contract or compulsory execution, he/she asserted that he/she is a bona fide beneficiary.

In a lawsuit for revocation of a fraudulent act, the good faith of a beneficiary shall be determined by the relationship between the debtor and the beneficiary, the details of and the background or motive for the act of disposal between the debtor and the beneficiary, and the terms and conditions of the act of disposal shall not have any special circumstances to doubt the normal transaction.

arrow