logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 안산지원 2018.01.18 2016가합8890
사해행위취소
Text

1.(a)

The debt repayment contract concluded on November 18, 2015 between Company B and the Defendant is within the scope of KRW 43,373,171.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a corporation whose purpose is packing business, etc.

From May 15, 2014 to February 4, 2015, the Plaintiff: (a) subcontracted a package work from D and completed the construction work; and (b) had the subcontractor’s claim amounting to KRW 70,000,000 as of February 11, 2015.

D was the intra-company director of B, and on February 11, 2015, in the column of joint and several sureties, the B representative E was signed and sealed.

B. On June 4, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against B seeking the payment of the said joint and several sureties (U.S. District Court 2015da118690), and the said court rendered a judgment on February 12, 2016 that “B shall pay to the Plaintiff the jointly and severally guaranteed amount of KRW 70,000,000, and damages for delay.”

C. B, on November 18, 2015, the Defendant, who is engaged in the Chang Construction Business under the trade name F, drafted a notarial deed of debt repayment (quasi-loan for consumption) relating to the construction cost of KRW 187,932,000 (quasi-loan for consumption) by G notary public’s joint office No. 1194, 2015 (hereinafter “instant debt repayment contract”). D.

At the time of the instant debt repayment contract, B’s active property was KRW 104, 11,711, and KRW 78,364,160 (hereinafter “instant investment certificate”) totaling KRW 78,375,975 (= KRW 11,711,711, KRW 764,160), and KRW 663,768,00,00 for creditors, including the Plaintiff and the Defendant.

At the time of the instant debt repayment contract, B was in excess of the debt.

E. On October 26, 2016, the Plaintiff appeared in the distribution procedure of the Suwon District Court Ansan Branch C, and stated an objection to the total dividend amount of the Defendant, and filed the instant lawsuit on October 31, 2016.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 9, 10, 12 (including each number), and the Enterprise Bank of this Court.

arrow