beta
Text
1. The plaintiffs' appeals against the defendants are all dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.
Reasons
A. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance as to this case is as stated in the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance except for the dismissal or addition as follows. Thus, it is acceptable to accept this as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. The judgment as to the establishment of the fraudulent act on September 26, 201, where the phrase “ September 27, 2011,” “ September 27, 2011,” of the 12th 3th 12 parallels (“Seoul District Court”) was put in parallel with “ September 26, 2011,” and “ October 7, 2010,” of the 3rd 16th 16 parallels “ September 26, 201” as “ October 7, 2011.”
(a) In case where a promissory note has been issued for the payment of existing debts, the issuance of such promissory note does not lead to a fraudulent act since the debtor's liability increases newly due to the issuance of such promissory note, unless there are special circumstances; and
(2) In light of the above legal principles, the act of fraudulent act refers to the act of causing damage to the creditor by actively reducing the debtor's property or increasing the creditor's property, or by deepening the fact that the debtor has already been in excess of his/her obligation, and thus, in order to constitute a fraudulent act, it should be presumed that the above act resulted from the above act. This should be based on the premise that, in order for the debtor to constitute a fraudulent act, to have a certain creditor bear the obligation from the beginning with the beginning for the purpose of having a specific creditor bear the obligation, and having the creditor bear the obligation for the purpose of having the creditor seize or seize the claim, which is the debtor's active property, and further having the creditor take the obligation with the purport of consenting to compulsory execution, and the creditor prepared a notarial deed stating the purport of consenting to compulsory execution, and then the creditor has transferred the debtor's claim to the specific creditor