logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 부천지원 2017.02.07 2015가단106594
사해행위취소
Text

1. On January 9, 2015, the sale and purchase contract for the motor vehicles listed in the separate sheet between the defendant and A (transfer of trade).

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff’s claim 1) Hyundai Card Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Modern Card”)

(2) On January 26, 2006, the Plaintiff entered into an agreement with A on the use of a credit card and issued a credit card to A on June 12, 2002, based on the credit acceptance agreement entered into between Hyundai Card. On February 8, 2015, the Plaintiff acquired the credit card payment claim against A of Hyundai Card, and on March 2, 2015, the Hyundai Card notified A of the transfer of the credit.

3) The Plaintiff filed an application with the Ulsan District Court for a payment order issued on April 21, 2015 with the purport to seek payment of KRW 45,401,012 and KRW 44,308,795, which is calculated at the rate of 24% per annum from April 18, 2015 to the date of full payment. The court issued the payment order on April 21, 2015, and the original copy of the payment order was served to A on April 27, 2015, but the said payment order became final and conclusive on May 12, 2015.

A was originally owned by A. A. On January 9, 2015, A transferred the instant motor vehicle to the Defendant at KRW 34,900,000 (hereinafter referred to as “the purchase and sale contract of January 9, 2015”).

On January 12, 2015, the name transfer registration was completed in the future of the Defendant. (c) On March 6, 2015, Ulsan District Court 2015Hadan5006, and 2015Ma5006, Ulsan District Court 2015.

A around the above time, the amount equivalent to KRW 200,000,000 for financial obligations, approximately KRW 180,000 for overdue health insurance premiums, and the deficit of B and C operated by them was accumulated and difficult to operate normally.

2) On June 8, 2015, the said court rendered a ruling of bankruptcy against A, and subsequently rendered a ruling of discontinuation on September 28, 2016, deeming that it is insufficient to cover the procedural costs with the A’s bankruptcy foundation. 3) Meanwhile, A made the said ruling of discontinuation.

arrow