logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2016.07.05 2015가단71975
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 December 30, 2014, the Plaintiff loaned the interest of KRW 8,700,000 to Nonparty B as a card loan, at 23% per annum (29% per annum for delay damages).

As of January 5, 2015, the date of the instant transaction, the Plaintiff did not disclose the credit card loan amount to B, and did not submit relevant evidence.

B. On January 5, 2015, Nonparty B sold the instant real estate to the Defendant at KRW 230,000,000 (hereinafter “instant sale”), and on the same day, Nonparty B (hereinafter “instant sale”), filed a registration of ownership transfer claim with the Defendant, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on January 28, 2015.

On the other hand, the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage-holder D (the maximum amount of 80,000,000 won) was completed on the instant real estate, but the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage was revoked on January 29, 2015, which was after the instant sale.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute between the parties, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

(a) Since the beneficiary's bad faith is presumed in a lawsuit seeking revocation of a fraudulent act, in order to be exempted from its responsibility, the beneficiary shall bear the burden of proving his good faith.

The issue of the beneficiary's good faith shall be determined reasonably in light of the logical and empirical rules by comprehensively taking into account various circumstances, such as the relationship between the debtor and the beneficiary, the details of the act of disposal between the debtor and the beneficiary, the background or motive leading to such act, whether there are no special circumstances to doubt that the terms and conditions of the act of disposal are normal and reasonable, and whether there are objective materials to support the act of disposal, and the circumstances after the act of disposal, etc.

(Supreme Court Decision 2014Da220132 Decided January 28, 2016). B.

The dispute between the parties.

arrow