logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.05.21 2017나86943
사해행위취소
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation on the instant case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, except for the following additional determination as to the Defendant’s assertion added or emphasized in the trial. Thus, this is cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Since the Defendant asserts that the establishment of a security contract for each of the instant real estate was completed between B and B at the beginning of 2015, which was before the Plaintiff’s claim for indemnity was created, and that the establishment of a security contract for each of the instant real estate was completed by the said security contract, the Defendant did not specify the specific time of concluding the security contract, the content of the contract, and the real estate sales contract (No. 5-1) prepared between B and the Defendant on each of the instant real estate between B does not include the date of concluding the contract, the purchase price, and the date of transfer of registration, but the B’s certificate of personal seal for selling real estate (No. 5-2) was issued on July 31, 2015 rather than the beginning of 2015, and the entire certificate of the registered matters of each of the instant real estate was written as the contract on August 19, 2015 on which the grounds for registration of the establishment of the security for the instant real estate was stated as the contract on each of the instant real estate.

The defendant's good faith in relation to B's fraudulent act shall be determined as of July 31, 2015, and according to the witness B's testimony of the first instance court witness B, the defendant was bona fide as of July 31, 2015. Thus, in a case where the debtor's disposal of property, such as the provision of security, to a third party, constitutes a fraudulent act, the beneficiary at the time of such fraudulent act is the beneficiary.

arrow