beta
Text
1. It was concluded on November 11, 2013 with respect to the share of 1/4 of the real estate listed in the separate sheet between the Defendant and B.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On April 10, 2009, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against B seeking indemnity amount under the Seoul Central District Court Decision 2009 Ghana1405217, and sentenced that “B shall pay to the Plaintiff 19% per annum from December 13, 2008 to May 3, 2009, and 20% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment.” The above judgment became final and conclusive around that time.
B. As the mother C of the agreement on division of inherited property died on November 11, 2013, four children, including B and the Defendant, jointly inherited the real estate listed in the separate sheet owned by the deceased C (hereinafter “instant real estate”). According to the evidence No. 1 of November 11, 2013, the above inheritor appears to have prepared an agreement on division of inherited property as of April 2, 2014 among the above inheritors, but as the ground for registration No. 4 appears to have been included in the inheritance by agreement division as of November 11, 2013, it is deemed that there was an agreement on division of inherited property on November 11, 2013 among the above inheritors.
The agreement on the division of inherited property (hereinafter “instant division agreement”) with the Defendant’s sole possession of the instant real estate was concluded, and the registration of the transfer of ownership in the name of the Defendant was completed on April 10, 2014 with respect to the instant real estate under the agreement on division.
C. At the time of the instant division consultation on the property status B, B, with positive property, had no particular property other than 1/4 shares in the statutory inheritance of the instant real estate, but had already been in excess of obligations, such as the Plaintiff’s liability for indemnity.
[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, fact-finding reply to the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination on the cause of the claim
A. According to the above facts, whether a fraudulent act is constituted or not, the existence of the preserved claim is recognized.