beta
Text
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the subsequent order of payment shall be revoked.
Reasons
1. Facts recognized;
A. The defendant is the plaintiff's fraudulent act.
(A) The spouse of C, who is a parent of the plaintiff, is the spouse of C.
D (A) around February 2014, the Plaintiff proposed that the Defendant be engaged in the manufacturing business of private goods with the trade name “E”, and the Defendant decided to operate a partnership with the said company in the form of investing and sharing profits with the amount of money of KRW 35 million, and completed the business registration for the “E” in its own name.
The Defendant: (a) directed and supervised workers working in the “E” workplace; and (b) deposited money transactions between the business account in the name of the Defendant and the F Bank account in the name of the Defendant’s spouse C; and (c) C managed and disbursed the funds of the individual fund and the “E” in combination with the funds of the said account.
C. The Defendant’s mother G was residing in the real estate in the name of the Defendant, but around June 2017, at the Defendant’s obligee’s request, the Defendant’s share in the Plaintiff’s ownership (as a result of the division of the common property, the ownership was divided into M& 428 square meters owned by the Defendant solely on November 17, 2017) among the land located in Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gu, the Defendant’s residence in the Defendant’s mother’s G in the auction procedure, was commenced on June 29, 2017 at the obligee’s request, and thereafter, on December 1, 2017, the Daejeon District Court N& and the decision to dismiss the said application for compulsory auction was completed.
After that, on July 21, 2017, the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 30 million from an I.D., and then remitted KRW 3,630,000 to J as the expense of attorney-at-law in relation to the above auction procedure. The Plaintiff remitted KRW 25 million to G.
(hereinafter referred to as “the details of the instant remittance”) D.
From January 2018, disputes have occurred between D and Defendant (and Defendant C) with respect to the settlement of profits of “E”.
Since May 28, 2018, D means that the defendant's mother will pay 2,8630,000 won, which constitutes the remittance of this case, to G.