beta
Text
1. Each of the instant lawsuits shall be dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. As to each of the instant legal actions filed by F, the actual owner of each of the instant real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1 and each of the instant real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 2 (hereinafter collectively referred to as “each of the instant real estate”) against the Defendants, asserting that the conclusion of each of the instant sales and trust agreements or each of the instant real estate to the Defendants constitutes a fraudulent act against the Plaintiff, the Defendant Company asserted that all of the instant legal actions constituted a fraudulent act against the Defendants, and that the Plaintiff filed the instant legal action only after one year has elapsed from the date on which the Plaintiff became aware of the grounds for revocation of the said fraudulent act, and that the instant legal action was unlawful as being filed after the lapse
2. The short-term exclusion period of one year is determined by the court below.
(a) In the exercise of the obligee’s right of revocation, Article 406(2) and Article 406(2) of the Civil Act (2) shall be brought within one year from the day when the obligee becomes aware of the cause of revocation and five years from the day when the juristic act was committed.
The "date when the creditor becomes aware of the cause of revocation" means the date when the debtor becomes aware of the fact that he/she committed a fraudulent act while knowing that he/she would prejudice the creditor. This is not sufficient to recognize the fact that the debtor performed a disposal act of the property, and it is also necessary to know that the debtor knew of the existence of a specific fraudulent act and, in this case, he/she had the intent to cause harm to the debtor. The burden of proof as to the lapse of the limitation period lies in the other party to the creditor revocation lawsuit.
(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Da63102, Mar. 26, 2009). Meanwhile, as a result of a creditor’s investigation on the debtor’s property status, the value of the real estate owned by the debtor is less than that of the total amount of the debtor’s own