beta
Text
1. On May 21, 2015, as to shares of 1/6 among each real estate indicated in the indication of attached real estate between the defendant and B.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Defendant’s father C owned each of the real estate indicated in the attachment (hereinafter “each of the instant real estate”) and died on May 21, 2015.
(b)as for the deceased C’s decedents, the Defendant, D, B, E, F, and G, a child;
C. On May 21, 2015, the inheritee entered into an agreement on the division of inherited property with the content that the Defendant inherited each of the instant real estate solely, and accordingly, on June 15, 2016, the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the Defendant was completed.
At the time, B was in excess of the obligation due to the credit card payment obligation against Samsung Card Co., Ltd.
On June 23, 2002, Samsung Card Co., Ltd.’s credit card payment claim against Samsung Card Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant preserved bond”) was created and transferred to the Plaintiff on July 31, 2013 through the Das/ASS Limited Liability Company, Promotion Savings Bank Co., Ltd., and DK Asset Management Loan Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant preserved bond”). This was notified to B.
E. The Plaintiff filed an application with the Seoul Central District Court for the payment order of the secured claim of this case with the Seoul Central District Court, and the above court issued the payment order to the effect that “B shall pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 62,327,124 and KRW 17,841,627 at a rate of 20% per annum from the next day of the service of the original payment order to the day of full payment (Seoul Central District Court 2014Da46598).”
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 2 (including all of the serial numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. According to the facts of the determination as to the cause of the claim, the agreement on division of the inherited property concluded on May 21, 2015, which included the fact that the Defendant would succeed to each part of the instant real estate, each of the instant real estate, which is the statutory equity shares in inheritance B, should be revoked because it constitutes a fraudulent act detrimental to the obligee against B by causing the shortage of liability property of B, which was in excess of liability.