logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2015.09.17 2015나4000
사해행위취소 등
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On May 22, 2013, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 90,000,000 to Nonparty C at an interest rate of KRW 14.9% per annum and 48 months principal and interest equal (hereinafter “instant loan”). Nonparty B jointly and severally guaranteed the Plaintiff’s obligation arising from the instant loan.

(2) C began to pay off the debt incurred from the instant loan from February 20, 2014. The remaining principal from November 26, 2014 to November 26, 2014 is KRW 34,957,512, and delay damages are KRW 9,869,963.

B. On April 26, 2013, B entered into a sales contract as to the real estate stated in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) (hereinafter “instant sales contract”) with the Defendant, one’s own mother, as the sole property between B and B’s property (hereinafter “instant real estate”). The same year:

5. 29. The Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer on the instant real estate.

【Fact-finding without a dispute over the ground for recognition, entries in Gap evidence 1 through 7 (including provisional number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the facts of the recognition of the establishment of the secured claim, the Plaintiff already held a guarantee claim as to the principal and interest of the loan to B at the time of the conclusion of the instant sales contract, and thus, the said claim is a secured claim seeking revocation of the fraudulent act as to the instant sales contract.

B. Whether a fraudulent act constitutes a fraudulent act, and "an act detrimental to a creditor" subject to the obligor's intent of revocation of creditor's right of revocation refers to an act that is conducted for the purpose of property right, and thereby, the obligor's passive property exceeds active property or the obligor's excessive debts are added.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da90047, Jan. 28, 2010). Moreover, barring any special circumstance, an obligor’s act of selling real estate, which is the only property of his/her own, and replacing it with or transferring it to another person without compensation.

arrow