beta
Text
1. As to the real estate listed in the separate sheet, a trade reservation entered into on October 7, 2015 between Defendant B and D, and a trade reservation entered into on September 20, 2016.
Reasons
Facts of recognition
On March 21, 2014, the Plaintiff provided loans to E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”) at an annual interest rate of KRW 100 million, at an overdue interest rate of 3.69% per annum, and at an overdue interest rate of 12% per annum (hereinafter “instant loans”); and D, an operator of the said company, jointly and severally guaranteed the said loans.
D On October 7, 2015, Defendant B entered into a pre-sale agreement with regard to the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”). On September 20, 2016, D entered into a sales contract with regard to the same real estate (hereinafter “instant pre-sale and contract”).
In addition, Defendant B completed the registration of ownership transfer on September 22, 2016.
Defendant B sold the instant real estate to Defendant C on October 5, 2016, and Defendant C completed the registration of ownership transfer on October 21, 2016.
The balance of the principal and interest of this case is KRW 106,304,612 as of May 25, 2017.
(Reasons for recognition) Facts without dispute, entries in Gap evidence 1 through 5, the purport of the whole pleadings.
Judgment
Unless there exist any special circumstances, it would be a fraudulent act to deem that the obligor constitutes a fraudulent act by selling real estate, which is the only property, and to change it into money easily for consumption (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 9Da2515, Apr. 9, 199). If the obligor’s property is insufficient to fully repay the obligor’s obligation, and the obligor transferred real estate without compensation or provided it as payment in kind to some creditors, such act constitutes a fraudulent act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 97Da57320, May 12, 1998), barring special circumstances (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 97Da57320, May 12, 1998). In the instant case, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence as seen earlier, the inquiry results with the Court Administration, and the entire purport of arguments, namely, D bears joint and several liability for loans exceeding KRW 100 million to the Plaintiff at the time of the instant reservation and contract