logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2018.08.10 2017나60847
사해행위취소등
Text

1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. As to the share of 27/27/27 out of C Forest land 274,281 square meters in a macro-city:

A. The defendant B.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff’s claim 1) on October 24, 2003, the Plaintiff’s total amount of 5,144,435 won (hereinafter “instant claim”) against ELD Investment Securities Co., Ltd. and Samsung Card Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant claim”).

2) After December 4, 2006, the Plaintiff applied for the payment order for the instant claim and its delay damages against B on December 4, 2006 (hereinafter “instant payment order”) and filed for the same month.

8. The order was received (Jincheon District Court Decision 2006Ra2177, Jincheon Branch Kimpo-si, 2006. Accordingly, the above original of the payment order was served on B on December 12, 2006, and the above payment order was finalized on December 27, 2006.

3) The Plaintiff applied for a payment order again against B on September 22, 2016 for the extension of the extinctive prescription period of a claim under the instant payment order on the same ground and received the payment order on October 7, 2016 (Dasan District Court Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Office B, and the said payment order was served on B on February 8, 2017, and the said payment order became final and conclusive on February 22, 2017.

(C) On February 6, 2017, the registration of ownership transfer was completed as of February 7, 2017, the Changwon District Court (Seoul District Court Dao District Court Dao District Office 4596, Feb. 7, 2017). At the time of the donation in the financial situation of B and the time of the closing of the argument of this case, B did not own active property except for the instant shares, and is in excess of obligations, such as the Plaintiff bears the above obligation. [In the absence of any dispute over recognition, each entry of subparagraphs 1 through 4, 1, and 4, the first instance court's Busan head of the Simyoung District Office, the head of Simsan District Tax Office,

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. Determination as to the existence of a preserved claim is made in B before the disposition of equity in this case.

arrow