(영문) 전주지방법원 2019.09.20 2018가단30339

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 전주지방법원 2019.09.20 2018가단30339

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 April 12, 2010, the Plaintiff filed an application for the payment order with Nonparty C as Seoul Central District Court Decision 2010 tea3974, and on April 12, 2010, the Plaintiff received the payment order (hereinafter “instant payment order”) from the above court that “the debtor (referring to the plaintiff in this case) shall pay 5,00,000 won to the creditor (referring to the plaintiff in this case) and 5% per annum from October 15, 1997 to the delivery date of the original copy of the payment order, and 20% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment” (hereinafter “the above payment order”). The above payment order was finalized at that time.

B. D, the owner of the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant apartment”) died on March 30, 2018, and the Defendant, Nonparty C, E, and F inherited D’s property at the ratio of 1/4 shares, respectively.

C. On October 4, 2018, the Defendant, Nonparty C, E, and F entered into a contract for the division of inherited property (hereinafter “instant agreement for division of inherited property”) with the content that the instant apartment is reverted to the Defendant, and completed the registration of ownership transfer in the future of the Defendant under the receipt No. 103528, Oct. 4, 2018, for the instant real property due to the said agreement.

At the time of the agreement for division of the inherited property of this case, 1/4 shares of the apartment of this case were the only active property C.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 3, 5 evidence, Gap 9-2 to 5 evidence, fact-finding results of this court's fact-finding, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. According to the above fact-finding on the existence of the preserved claim, the Plaintiff’s claim against C based on the payment order of this case arising on April 12, 2010, prior to the agreement on division of inherited property of this case, and thus, the above claim can be the preserved claim of the obligee’s right of revocation.

B. Determination as to whether the agreement on division of the inherited property of this case constitutes a fraudulent act is made 1).

유사 판례

-전주지방법원 2018.12.14 2018가단12560

-전주지방법원 2017.01.18 2016가단6660

-수원지방법원 성남지원 2018.08.22 2017가단223599

-대구지방법원포항지원 2020.08.13 2020가단102400

-대구지방법원포항지원 2020.10.15 2020가단3473