logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 청주지방법원제천지원 2020.04.29 2019가단2243
사해행위취소
Text

1. As to each real estate listed in the separate sheet:

A. A donation contract concluded on April 27, 2018 between the Defendant and C is concluded.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On March 14, 2017, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 15,000,00 to C at the interest rate of KRW 15,000,00,000, calculated by adding 6.23% to the COFX standard interest rate for one year, and the period of loan from March 14, 2017 to March 14, 2018.

Aftermath, the Plaintiff and C extended the lending period under the above lending agreement until March 14, 2019.

B. On May 3, 2018, C completed the registration of ownership transfer to the Defendant on the ground of the gift on April 27, 2018 (hereinafter “instant gift agreement”) from Cheongju District Court No. 10631 to 10631 of receipt of Cheongju District Court’s Support for each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

(hereinafter referred to as the "registration of transfer of ownership of this case") / [Grounds for recognition] / Each entry of Gap Nos. 1 and 2 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The Plaintiff alleged that the instant donation contract was a fraudulent act, and sought revocation and cancellation of the ownership transfer registration of the instant case.

As seen above, the Plaintiff’s loan claim against the Defendant, a preserved bond, was incurred prior to the instant gift agreement, and thus, the remainder of the requirements is examined below.

A. The act of a debtor’s transfer of real estate, which is one of his/her sole property, to another without compensation, constitutes a fraudulent act against a creditor, barring any special circumstances (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2000Da41875, Apr. 24, 2001). The debtor’s intent of deception is presumed to be presumed (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2000Da41875, Apr. 24, 2001).

In addition, considering the overall purport of evidence Nos. 5 and 6, C was in excess of its obligation as indicated below at the time of the gift contract of this case.

Therefore, the amount of positive property shall be KRW 48,124,800,00 in attached Table 1 of the amount of debt officially announced by the type of positive property.

arrow