logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2016.11.10 2016가단204275
사해행위취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On June 28, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a contract to purchase C 45 passenger buses (hereinafter “instant vehicles”) from B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “B”) with KRW 16 million for the purchase of the instant vehicles at KRW 1.6 million. At the same time, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with B on the instant vehicles.

The plaintiff paid 46 million won out of the vehicle sale price to B, and as a guarantor, paid interest on the debt of 60 million won as the debt of the loan of 60 million won to B in lieu of the payment of the purchase price of 60 million won.

B. On February 17, 2014, the Plaintiff terminated the instant vehicle access contract, and on the same day, concluded a contract to sell the instant vehicle to Nonparty D.

C. On August 22, 2014, B entered into a contract with the Defendant to sell to the Defendant all KRW 1,986,700,000 of the buses indicated in the attached property indicated in B, including the instant vehicle, for KRW 49,000 (hereinafter “the instant bus sales contract”). At the time, the price of the instant vehicle was set at KRW 79,20,000.

On the same day B entered into a business license transfer agreement (hereinafter “instant bus business license transfer agreement”) with the Defendant to receive KRW 269,00,000 as the transfer price by transferring all the rights to the car number plate, the bus service provider’s business rights, etc.

Meanwhile, the bus sales contract of this case and the bus 49 buses subject to the transfer of bus business rights transfer contract of this case and assets such as business rights were all assets with property value B and property value.

[Ground of recognition] The items of evidence Nos. 5, 1, 3, witness E, and D's each testimony, the whole purport of the pleading

2. Determination:

A. In full view of the existence of the Plaintiff’s preserved claim (1) as to the Plaintiff’s preserved claim, the Plaintiff sold the instant vehicle to D on February 17, 2014, and received KRW 95 million from B, and the Plaintiff is obliged to pay the sales amount.

arrow