(영문) 대구지방법원김천지원 2017.11.29 2017가단946

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) 대구지방법원김천지원 2017.11.29 2017가단946

사해행위취소

Text

1. The gift contract concluded on August 23, 2016 between the Defendant and C on each real estate listed in the separate sheet is 66,349.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On June 7, 2016, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against C seeking unjust enrichment equivalent to the rental fee from June 19, 2006 to October 27, 2015 due to the possession or use of each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) by this court (hereinafter “instant real estate”). On January 18, 2017, the court rendered a judgment that “C shall pay to the Plaintiff 59,045,631 won and its interest calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from January 19, 2017 to the date of full payment,” and the said judgment became final and conclusive as is on February 4, 2017.

B. On August 23, 2016, C entered into a gift agreement with the Defendant on the instant real estate (hereinafter “instant gift agreement”) and completed the registration of ownership transfer to the Defendant on August 24, 2016.

C. As to the instant real estate, C completed on May 29, 2006 the registration of creation of a mortgage consisting of KRW 130 million with the maximum debt amount, and on April 14, 2009, the registration of creation of a mortgage consisting of KRW 46 million with the maximum debt amount, and completed on August 24, 2016 with D on August 24, 2016.

C On December 24, 2001, with respect to the real estate stated in paragraph 4 of the attached list to the direct branch agricultural cooperative on December 24, 2001, the establishment registration of a neighboring mortgage amounting to 45 million won was completed.

On August 31, 2016, the registration of creation of a neighboring mortgage was cancelled.

E. At the time of the donation contract of this case, C did not have any property other than the instant real property.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts, the Plaintiff’s claim for return of unjust enrichment against C was already established at the time of the donation contract of this case, and thus, the above claim for return of unjust enrichment can be the preserved claim of creditor’s claim for return of unjust enrichment.

(b) If the obligor has donated his/her property to another person under excess of his/her obligation.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2020.05.29 2018가합7998

-광주고등법원 2020.11.18 2018나25044

-대구지방법원김천지원 2016.10.12 2015가단7417

-대전지방법원 천안지원 2018.04.18 2017가단101696

-대구지방법원 김천지원 2017.02.22 2016가단31790