logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2016.12.14 2016나24637
사해행위취소
Text

1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

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

A. On September 27, 2012 between the Defendant and B

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On April 26, 2012, the Industrial Bank of Korea loaned KRW 100,000,000 to C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) as the subject of corporate purchase loan, and the said lending obligation was jointly and severally guaranteed by B at the time.

B. The Bank issued a payment order from the Bank of Korea to the Plaintiff, in sequence, through the Doginininsula and the United Nations Es.S. Specialized Company on the Asset-backed Securitization (hereinafter “instant loan claim”). The Plaintiff filed an application for payment order under the Gwangju District Court 2014j. 19378 on January 21, 2015, stating that “The debtor shall pay to the creditor 81,270,097 won and its related interest, five percent per annum from October 26, 2013 to the day of the delivery of payment order, and twenty percent per annum from the next day to the day of full payment.” The above payment order was served on February 3, 2015 to the debtor and confirmed on February 18, 2015.

C. B entered into a sales contract with the Defendant on September 27, 2012 (hereinafter “instant sales contract”) with respect to each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet owned by it (hereinafter “each of the instant real estate”), and completed the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the Defendant (hereinafter “each of the instant real estate transfer registration”) under the Seoul Northern District Court’s Northern District Court’s receipt No. 86048, Sept. 28, 2012.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, entry in Gap evidence 1, 2, and 3 (including virtual numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The conclusion of the instant sales contract with the Defendant on each of the instant real estate in excess of the debt constitutes a fraudulent act, and thus, the said sales contract should be revoked. The Defendant is obligated to implement the procedure for the cancellation of each of the instant transfer of ownership registration to the Plaintiff, a creditor of B, with restitution to the original state.

Preliminaryly, this case.

arrow