(영문) 수원지방법원 2017.07.06 2016나71850

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 수원지방법원 2017.07.06 2016나71850

사해행위취소

Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited in the judgment is as follows: “The defendant claims that B would be exempt from the debt 30,000,000,000 at the fourth bottom of the judgment of the court of first instance, and that it would substitute for the payment of the down payment of the sales contract of this case, but the defendant alleged that B would have been exempt from the debt 30,000,000,000,000,000; the defendant at the fifth end of the judgment shall be dismissed as "the mortgagee" as "the plaintiff of the court of first instance; and the defendant at the fifth end of the judgment shall be dismissed as the ground of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition

2. Additional determination

A. By February 19, 2014, the Defendant’s assertion that the instant sales contract was concluded by the Defendant, at the C’s request, deposited KRW 56,00,000, and the amount that the Defendant repaid to the Defendant by B was KRW 27,00,000, and the Defendant claimed KRW 29,000,000 against B.

The said money is to substitute for the payment of down payment under the instant sales contract.

Therefore, in addition to the fact that the defendant paid interest on loans, the defendant is not aware that the sales contract of this case was detrimental to the creditor, so the plaintiff's claim shall be dismissed as it is without merit.

B. According to the reasoning of the judgment in subparagraph 5 and the response of the order to submit financial transaction information to the post office of this court, the defendant remitted B account KRW 1,00,000,000 on February 26, 2013, and KRW 15,00,000 on March 13, 2013, KRW 10,000,00 on March 13, 2013, and KRW 7,000,000 on May 16, 2013, and KRW 3,00,000,000 on July 4, 2013, and KRW 20,000 on July 4, 20, 200, KRW 5,000 on October 20, 200, KRW 56,000 on each of the Defendant’s obligations to the Plaintiff’s account, and KRW 10,000 on May 10, 2010.

However, in full view of the purport of the argument as a result of the above reply, this case.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

유사 판례

-서울동부지방법원 2015.12.11 2015가합234

-부산지방법원 2021.01.15 2020나44602

-서울북부지방법원 2014.09.26 2014가단2218

-서울동부지방법원 2015.07.08 2014나9368