logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2015.07.23 2014나2034476
사해행위취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

purport, purport, and.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On September 4, 2012, D entered into a sales contract with Defendant B, the starting partner of Defendant B, on the real estate indicated in attached Table 1 (hereinafter “instant real estate”). On October 12, 2012, D completed the registration of ownership transfer under E with respect to the instant real estate.

B. On September 4, 2012, D entered into a sales contract with Defendant C on the real estate listed in attached Table 2 (hereinafter “instant second real estate”) and completed the registration of ownership transfer under Defendant C’s name on October 12, 2012.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 9 and 10, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the claim against the defendant B

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion F and D entered into a partnership agreement with the content that jointly promotes the business of constructing and selling the main complex building. On April 6, 2011, F borrowed KRW 170 million from the Plaintiff as funds for the said business. After the termination of the partnership agreement on June 29, 2012, F and D assumed the Defendant’s entire obligation to F.

D in excess of the debt with the intent to prejudice the creditors during which the Plaintiff had been liable for the said borrowed money as above, on July 4, 2012, donated KRW 210 million to Defendant B, and on September 4, 2012, sold the real estate No. 1 to E, and then donated KRW 60 million out of the sales price to Defendant B.

Therefore, each contract of gift as of July 4, 2012 and September 4, 2012 as of September 4, 2012 constitutes a fraudulent act, and thus, the contract of gift as of September 4, 2012 should be revoked. As a result of the revocation, Defendant B should pay the Plaintiff the compensation amount of KRW 210 million and the damages for delay.

B. Comprehensively taking account of the existence of the preserved claim Nos. 1, 3-1, 2, and 5 of the evidence Nos. 3-1, 5, and part of the testimony of Party F witness of Party F, F and D are newly constructed and sold on the G ground of Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on April 22, 2010.

arrow