logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2019.05.09 2018나24493
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 reasons for the acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows, except for the supplementary decision as to the assertion emphasized by the defendant in this court, and therefore, they are cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Supplementary judgment

A. 1) The defendant asserts that the transfer and acquisition contract of this case constitutes a commercial activity between merchants as part of the method of repayment for the settlement of excess payment for the completion payment for the subcontracted project of this case, and thus, the defendant acquired commercial lien which can be paid in preference to ordinary creditors, and therefore, even if the defendant received the above materials as payment in kind, it cannot be deemed that C’s responsible property decreased, and thus, it does not constitute a fraudulent act. 2) The above circumstances are as follows: ① Commercial lien can be exercised against the goods owned by the debtor through commercial activity, i.e., ① commercial lien can be exercised against the goods owned by the debtor through commercial activity; the defendant merely occupied the Plaintiff’s goods as the owner after receiving the above materials as payment for the excess payment for the construction price refund for C; ② so long as the contract of this case is revoked as a fraudulent act in relation to the Plaintiff, it cannot be deemed that the defendant occupies the goods owned by the debtor C, and there is no room for the defendant to establish the lien against the Plaintiff’s supply of the above materials.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

B. Determination as to the assertion that the Plaintiff’s supply material was not present at the time of the instant transfer and acquisition agreement, the Defendant already consumed the Plaintiff’s supply material in the construction at the time of entering into the instant transfer and acquisition agreement.

arrow