(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.04.30 2014나57067

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) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.04.30 2014나57067

대여금

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. The reasons for this Court’s acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows, except where the defendant added the following judgments as to the matters alleged in the trial of the court of first instance, and thus, they are cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The Defendant asserts that the Plaintiff’s each of the loan claims against A did not have occurred on July 17, 2013, which was at the time of the conclusion of the instant gift agreement, or that, after the conclusion of the instant gift agreement, A was in arrears and lost its interest, the Plaintiff did not have any preserved claim at the time of the conclusion of the instant gift agreement.

In addition, the obligee’s right of revocation does not require that the due date has arrived. In full view of the purport of pleading No. 1-1, the Plaintiff concluded an agreement with a small and medium enterprise loan agreement with A on February 17, 2012 and lent KRW 20 million to A. As long as the Plaintiff’s above loan claim against A was established at the time of the conclusion of the gift agreement of this case, the obligee’s right of revocation may become the obligee’s right of revocation regardless of whether A has lost its interest due to delinquency.

In addition, in principle, the preserved claim entitled to exercise the obligee's right of revocation is already existing at the time of the fraudulent act, but it is highly probable that at the time of the fraudulent act, there has already been legal relations that form the basis of the establishment of the claim, and that the claim should be established in the near future, and in the near future, the claim may also become the preserved claim of the obligee's right of revocation in the near future. In full view of the overall purport of arguments in each of the items of subparagraphs A-1 and 2-1 and 2-2, prior to the donation contract of this case, the credit card subscription contract of this case and

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

유사 판례

-광주지방법원 2017.06.30 2016나60064

-대법원 1996. 2. 9. 선고 95다14503 판결

-의정부지방법원 2015.11.06 2014가단46686

-창원지방법원 2017.01.24 2015나8548

-인천지방법원 2012. 05. 25. 선고 2009가단108084 판결