beta
Text
1. Defendant B shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 165,00,000 and KRW 150,000 among them, from August 1, 2013 to the date of full payment.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant B (1) on November 30, 2012, the Plaintiff leased KRW 200 million to Defendant B on a monthly basis (12% per annum), KRW 1.5% per annum (18%) per annum, and the due date on May 31, 2013.
(2) On July 31, 2013, Defendant B paid to the Plaintiff KRW 50 million out of the principal of the instant loan, but did not pay interest on the instant loan from March 1, 2013.
B. The Defendants entered into the instant donation contract, as married couple, owned 1/2 shares of the instant real estate. However, on March 19, 2013, the Defendants entered into a donation contract with respect to 1/2 shares of the instant real estate (hereinafter “instant donation contract”), and on January 2, 2014, completed the registration of ownership transfer in Defendant C on the ground of donation with respect to Defendant B’s shares among the instant real estate.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence Nos. 8 and 9, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. According to the above facts of recognition as to the claim against Defendant B, Defendant B is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff damages for delay at the rate of 18% per annum from August 1, 2013 to the date of full payment (=150 million won (=20 million won x 1.5% x 5 million)) and 150 million among them.
3. Determination as to the claim against Defendant C
A. Defendant B, while the Plaintiff’s assertion was insolvent, entered into a gift agreement with Defendant C on shares 1/2 of the instant real estate, which should be revoked as a fraudulent act, and Defendant C is obligated to implement the procedure for registration of cancellation of ownership transfer on the instant real estate to restore the original state to its original state.
B. (1) In order to become a fraudulent act, the debtor's act of disposing of his/her assets should cause a decrease in the debtor's whole property and fall short of the joint security of claims due to such act.