logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원의성지원 2017.10.24 2017가합10014
사해행위취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. The Plaintiff’s assertion: (a) the Daegu District Court 2014Da78488 against D (hereinafter “D”) bears the liability for judgment based on the claim for the purchase price of goods; (b) for E, a notary public bears the obligation for joint and several liability of KRW 300 million based on the F Law Firm No. 2333, 2013, and the Plaintiff is the assignee for each of the above claims received from D and E.

However, on March 26, 2014, when Defendant C sold to Defendant B, the name of the owner of the instant building, which was under construction on the two lots outside the above land at the time, at the time of the sale of 496 square meters in Sung-gun, Sung-gun, Sung-gun (hereinafter “instant land”) in excess of his/her obligation, and the registration of ownership preservation on the instant building was completed under Defendant B’s name on August 26, 2016. The above change of the owner of the instant building should be deemed a sales contract for the instant building, and such change of the owner of the instant building should be deemed null and void as a false declaration or should be revoked as a fraudulent act.

2. The Plaintiff asserts that the change in the name of the owner of the instant building between the Defendants constitutes a conspiracy or fraudulent act, and the Defendants revoked the sales contract concluded on March 26, 2014 with respect to the instant building, and sought the procedure for the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of the restoration of real name as to the instant building.

However, the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is difficult to determine whether the instant building, which was under construction on the instant land at the time of the change of the owner’s name, satisfies the requirements as an independent building and could have become an independent object of sale without complying with the instant land. Even if the building satisfies the requirements of an independent building that can be subject to sale at the time of the change of the owner’s name, the change of the owner’s name on the instant building between the Defendants is made.

arrow