beta
Text
1. The sales contract concluded on August 21, 201 between the Defendant and B on the real estate stated in the separate sheet between the Defendant and B is 220,40.
Reasons
1. Indication of claim;
A. On June 13, 2011, B was sentenced to three years of imprisonment for violating the Attorney-at-Law Act and a surcharge of KRW 1,185,00,000 by the Daejeon High Court, and on August 12, 2011, the appeal against the above judgment was dismissed and the above judgment became final and conclusive on the same day. As of the closing date of the pleadings of the instant case, the Plaintiff has a claim for a surcharge of KRW 1,185,00,000 against B.
B. B sold real estate listed in the attached list to the Defendant on August 21, 2011, and on October 4, 2011, the registration of ownership transfer was completed by this Court No. 105797, which was based on the above sale in the Defendant’s future.
C. At the time of sale as above, the amount equivalent to the market price of the real estate listed in the separate sheet was KRW 770,000,000 for the Plaintiff’s claim 1,185,00,000 against B, and as at the time, B was in excess of the Plaintiff’s obligation. Since the said real estate was the only property of B, it is presumed that B and the Defendant’s will of death.
Meanwhile, prior to the Defendant’s registration of ownership transfer, the registration of the establishment of a mortgage over the maximum debt amount of KRW 549,60,000 was completed in the future of Han Bank, Han Bank, Inc., prior to the Defendant’s registration of ownership transfer. However, since the registration of the establishment of a mortgage over the above real estate was cancelled on November 11, 201, the Plaintiff was obligated to pay damages for delay calculated at the annual rate of 5% as provided by the Civil Act from the market price of the above real estate at the time of the closure of the argument in this case, deducting the maximum debt amount of KRW 549,60,000 from the market price of the above real estate at the time of the conclusion of the argument in this case, to the extent of KRW 220,400,00,000, which was concluded on August 21, 2011 between the Defendant and B.
2. Article 208 (3) 3 of the Civil Procedure Act (Judgment by public notice) of the applicable provisions of Acts;