logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구고등법원 2020.01.09 2019나21218
사해행위취소
Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant is modified as follows.

Defendant and the co-defendant A.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance citing this case is that the defendant among the grounds of the judgment of the court of first instance citing this case is identical to the part of the judgment of the court of first instance citing this case, and thus, it is citing this as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420

2. On January 2018, 2018, the part of the court of first instance, 3rd nine parallels of the judgment of the court of first instance, “B” around January 2017.

Each real estate stated in the attached Table 1 "B" list of 3 pages 15 of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be changed to each real estate.

In principle, in the event that a legal act on real estate constitutes a fraudulent act, such as revocation of a fraudulent act and cancellation of a registration of transfer of ownership, in principle, in the case where a legal act on real estate constitutes a fraudulent act, the part "the scope of revocation of a fraudulent act and restoration to original state" in the 8th parallel 2 to 9th parallel 12 parallels of the first instance judgment shall be as follows. However, in the case where a fraudulent act on real estate on which a mortgage is established is established, such fraudulent act shall be established only within the extent of the balance obtained by deducting the secured claim amount of the mortgage from the value of the real estate at which the mortgage is established. Therefore, in the case where a registration of creation of a mortgage is revoked by repayment after a fraudulent act, etc., ordering the revocation of a fraudulent act and the restoration of the real estate itself to the extent that the portion that was not originally secured by the general creditors is restored to the portion that was not jointly secured by the mortgage, and thus, it is possible to seek compensation for the value thereof within the extent of the balance obtained by deducting the secured debt amount of the mortgage from the value of such real estate.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 98Da41490, Sept. 7, 199). (b) the evidence mentioned above and the result of the order to submit financial transaction information to G unions of the first instance court.

arrow