(영문) 서울고등법원 2019.03.29 2018나2024644

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울고등법원 2019.03.29 2018나2024644

구상금

Text

1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the court of first instance, including the plaintiff's claim changed from the trial court, is as follows:

Reasons

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

A. The reasoning for the court’s explanation concerning the instant case is next to the judgment of the first instance.

In addition to the revision as stated in paragraph (2) and addition of the judgment in the next trial, the relevant part shall be cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, since the judgment in the first trial is the same as that in respect of the defendant.

B. Part 1) The amendment of the first instance court’s decision No. 4, the “property” of the first instance court’s 3 as “real estate,” and the “Defendant A was declared bankrupt on December 18, 2017 by Seoul Rehabilitation Court No. 2017Hadan5407, and the Plaintiff was appointed as the trustee in bankruptcy.” 2) The first instance court’s 3-A.

The part of Paragraph 1 (B) is deleted from the end of the fifth to the end of the same period, and the "establishment of fraudulent act" of Item 1 in the sixth part is deemed to be "(b) act subject to denial," and the third part from the seventh end to the third end is deemed to be "establishment of the obligation to reinstate."

3) Article 17 and 18 of the first instance court's judgment "this court" in the second instance court's "the fraudulent act" in the second instance court's "the act constitutes "the act committed by an obligor under Article 391 subparagraph 1 of the Debtor Rehabilitation Act, which is the object of intentional avoidance," and Article 7 and 8 of the first instance court's "the act committed by an obligor, who knows that it would prejudice bankruptcy creditors" and "the act constitutes "the act committed by a fraudulent act" in the seventh and third instance judgment of the first instance court's judgment "the act committed by an associate person" and "as known in the facts recognized above" in the first instance court's 7 and 8 "the act committed by an associate person" shall be deemed "the act committed by the obligor," respectively, and the "the act committed by the Defendant B" in the second instance court's first instance court's "the act as seen above" shall be added.

5 The second act is a fraudulent act from the seventh end of the judgment of the first instance.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

-채무자 회생 및 파산에 관한 법률 제391조 제1호

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 2017.09.29 2017나2026728

-서울고등법원 2017.12.08 2017나2035234

-서울고등법원 2019.02.15 2018나2029045

-서울고등법원 2017.11.17 2017나2039984

-서울고등법원 2020.08.28 2019나2051018