Korea

Defendant (Attorney Park Young-chul, Counsel for defendant-appellant)

December 7, 2017

Seoul Southern District Court Decision 2015Da234002 Decided December 13, 2016

1. Of the judgment of the first instance court, the part against the defendant in excess of the following cancellation and payment order shall be revoked, and the plaintiff's claim corresponding to the cancellation part shall be dismissed

A. The sales contract concluded on March 8, 2013 with respect to the real estate listed in the separate sheet between the Defendant and Nonparty 1 shall be revoked within the limit of KRW 92 million.

B. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 92 million won with 5% interest per annum from the day following the day this judgment became final and conclusive to the day of full payment.

2. The defendant's remaining appeal is dismissed.

3. Of the total litigation costs, 1/20 shall be borne by the Plaintiff, and the remainder by the Defendant, respectively.

1. Purport of claim

A. The sales contract concluded on March 8, 2013 with respect to the real estate listed in the separate sheet between the Defendant and Nonparty 1 shall be revoked within the limit of KRW 97 million.

B. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 97 million won with 5% interest per annum from the day following the day this judgment became final and conclusive to the day of full payment.

2. Purport of appeal

The judgment of the first instance is revoked. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasoning of this Court is as follows, in addition to the rejection of each description of the evidence of Nos. 6 or 11 (including a serial number) that is insufficient to recognize the defendant's assertion as evidence that is additionally submitted in the trial of the court, and the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, this Court cited it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Parts in height:

A. From 12 to 12, the first instance court's decision No. 5 of the first instance court's decision "as recognized" is followed:

“In accordance with the result of the appraisal by Nonparty 3 of the trial party, the market price of the instant real estate between March 2013 and May 2013 can be recognized as having been 215 billion won, and it is confirmed that the same price is also the same as the date of the closing of the oral argument at the trial at the trial. Therefore, the value of the joint security as a limit of revocation of fraudulent act and compensation for value is KRW 215 million after deducting KRW 123 million from the amount of the secured debt at KRW 200 million.”

(b) the first instance court’s 20, 21, and 6-1 of the first instance judgment “97 million won” shall each be “92 million won”.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified within the scope of the above recognition, and the remaining claims are dismissed as it is without merit. Since the judgment of the court of first instance is unfair with a different conclusion, the part against the defendant ordering cancellation and payment in excess of the above recognition scope among the judgment of the court of first instance is revoked and the plaintiff's claim corresponding to the revoked part is dismissed, and the defendant's remaining appeal is dismissed. It is so

[Attachment]

Judges Jeong Chang-jin (Presiding Judge)