beta
Text
1. The contract of donation amounting to KRW 19,70,000 on March 12, 2012 between the Defendant and B (Representative Director C) shall be revoked.
2...
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. 1) On March 30, 2009, the Plaintiff Company B (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) on March 30, 2009
(A) The credit guarantee agreement between the credit guarantee and the principal amount of KRW 170,000 (200,000 for a loan) and KRW 229,50,000 for a loan (300,000 for a loan) and for a credit guarantee agreement between March 29, 2012, respectively (hereinafter “the credit guarantee agreement in this case”).
(2) Around March 14, 2012, the representative director C and D of the non-party company jointly and severally guaranteed the liability for reimbursement under the credit guarantee agreement of this case.) The non-party company submitted a credit guarantee statement issued under the credit guarantee agreement of this case to us to us bank and borrowed each expected amount of the above loans. However, the financial standing of the non-party company went worse, and eventually, the non-party company lost the benefit of each of the above loans due to the disposition of default on payment on March 14, 2012. The plaintiff subrogated the above bank to 400,59,845 won in total.
3) On April 16, 2012, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit claiming reimbursement against Nonparty Company C and C, and D, Seoul Western District Court 2012dan207114, and the judgment of winning the Plaintiff was rendered on July 26, 2012 and became final and conclusive around that time. (B) On the other hand, on March 12, 2012, the Nonparty Company transferred KRW 19,700,000 to the new bank account under the name of the Defendant, the spouse of the representative director C of the Nonparty Company, prior to the bankruptcy (hereinafter “instant remittance”).
(C) The non-party company’s financial status of the non-party company was liable for the debt 140,00,000 won to D’s wife, the director’s debt 364,948,434 won to New River Co., Ltd., and the bank’s loan liability, while there was no special positive property. However, the non-party company was in excess of its obligation due to the lack of positive property. [The non-party company’s financial status of the non-party company’s financial status of the non-party company, the statement of evidence Nos. 1 through 6, the inquiry of the Court Administration Office, the result of this court’s inquiry