beta
Text
1. Between the Defendant and C and D, and between C and D, on February 25, 2016, concerning the right to lease on a deposit basis listed in the separate sheet.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. As C’s friendship, the Plaintiff, at the request of C and its wife D, lent KRW 20 million to C and D by remitting KRW 3 million on October 16, 2013, and KRW 17 million on October 30, 2013 to D.
B. Around January 28, 2016, the Defendant, who is a father of C and D, prepared a written contract to establish a right to lease on a deposit basis, such as a right to lease on a deposit basis as recorded in the separate sheet, E and E. Under the said contract, E, a lessor, had the right to lease on a deposit basis at the lessee’s expense.
The Defendant transferred KRW 30 million to D from February 15, 2016 to February 25, 2016, and D paid KRW 30 million to E as KRW 30 million.
The defendant received the registration of establishment of a right of lease on the same deposit basis as the right of lease on the deposit basis as indicated in the attached Table from the Changwon District Court (No. 3667 of February 25, 2016) by reason of the contract to establish the same day.
The above immovables are residing in C and D, and the defendant has not resided in the above immovables.
C. On September 8, 2016, the Plaintiff filed a fraudulent complaint with C and D in 2016, but agreed to receive KRW 200,000 from the criminal conciliation to the end of each month from September 30, 2016, and revoked the complaint on September 8, 2016. However, the Plaintiff did not receive the money other than the repayment of KRW 200,000 on October 4, 2016.
C and D bear obligations to many creditors including the Plaintiff from January 2016 to the present, while they are in excess of obligations without any particular positive property.
[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 11 (if there are provisional numbers, including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. The following circumstances revealed in the facts and records on the establishment of a fraudulent act, i.e., the right to lease on a deposit basis listed in the attached list, are intended to reside in C and D, also D, and there is insufficient evidence to deem that the Defendant provided KRW 30 million for the deposit.