beta
Text
1. On October 17, 2014, 1/5 shares of each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet between the Defendant and B are concluded.
Reasons
1. Determination as to the cause of claim
A. The Korea Asset Management Corporation filed a lawsuit against the subsidiary trade company, C, and B with the Seoul Central District Court 2008Gahap25317, Jun. 24, 2008. The above court rendered a final judgment on June 24, 2008 that "the defendants jointly and severally against the plaintiff 229,737,074 won and 98,041 won out of the above money, as of February 26, 2008 and April 4, 2008, Defendant C shall be liable to pay the amount calculated at the respective rate of 20% per annum from the following day to May 31, 2008, and from the day of complete payment."
(2) On September 18, 2012, Teyn Loan Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the “Plaintiff”) notified the transfer of credit to B on November 14, 2012 upon receipt of the claim for the foregoing judgment amount from the Korea Asset Management Corporation and delegation of the authority to notify the transfer.
(3) On October 17, 2014, B entered into an agreement on the division of inherited property (hereinafter “instant agreement”) with the Defendant, each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “each of the instant real estate”), which is the sole property between the Defendant and the Defendant, as the sole property in excess of the debt (hereinafter “instant real estate”). The Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer listed in Paragraph (2) of the order, which is based on the inheritance agreement division as to each of the above real estate, including one-fifth share.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entries in Gap's evidence 1 through 6 (including provisional number), and the purport of whole pleadings
B. In cases where a debtor in excess of his/her obligation already agreed on the division of his/her inherited property while giving up his/her right to his/her share of inheritance and the joint security against general creditors has decreased, it constitutes a fraudulent act against
I would like to say.
(See Supreme Court Decision 2007Da29119 Decided July 26, 2007). The above facts of recognition are examined.