logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2016.06.24 2015가단114620
사해행위취소
Text

1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. C (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) from October 23, 2012 to around 23, 2012, operated the business of bath, swimming pool, camping, etc. with the trade name “E” on the land outside D and two parcels of land outside Busan City, and subsequently, the Defendant operated the same business with the trade name “F” from around July 30, 2014 to September 14, 2015.

B. Meanwhile, the Plaintiff, against Nonparty Company, issued a final and conclusive payment order (the payment order for 2014Guj2354 on August 13, 2014) with respect to the construction cost, and the content thereof was ordered by the small and medium company to set up a ice link to the International Leisure Industry Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”), and the international leisure industry re-subcontracts to the Plaintiff. However, the non-party Company did not pay 74580,000 won for the international leisure industry and the Plaintiff was assigned with the unpaid claim for the construction payment from the international leisure industry, and thus, the non-party Company should pay the Plaintiff the above KRW 7458,58,00 and its delay damages.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 3, Eul evidence 5

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserts that the part concerning the claim for revocation of the fraudulent act and restitution of the original status is that the Defendant took over the business of “F” from the non-party company on July 30, 2014, and that the above business transfer agreement constitutes the fraudulent act of the non-party company and sought revocation and restitution of the original status. The Defendant asserts that not only did the non-party company conclude the business transfer agreement but also did not prove the requirements for the claim for revocation of the fraudulent act, such as the non-party company’s insolvency, etc.

The part of the claim is to be examined, and here, the owner of the real estate in the location of the non-party company's insolvency and the real estate in the above "E" is the non-party company.

arrow