logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.08.23 2017가단5135900
사해행위취소
Text

1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On April 2, 2007, Nonparty B had a place of business in Pyeongtaek-si C, and operated the landscape gardening construction and floating tree wholesale and retail business with D’s trade name. On September 15, 2011, the Plaintiff, as an insurer, entered into a credit guarantee agreement with B as set forth below, and based on that agreement, B entered into a new bank (hereinafter “foreign bank”).

(2) A loan of KRW 50,000 was granted from the Plaintiff. According to the credit guarantee agreement as seen above, the Defendant loaned KRW 50,000 to the Plaintiff when the Plaintiff performed the guaranteed obligation on September 15, 201: (a) the amount of the Plaintiff’s performance of the guaranteed obligation; (b) the amount calculated by the rate determined by the Plaintiff from the date of performance to the date of repayment; (c) the expenses incurred in the preservation, transfer, and exercise of the right acquired through the performance of the guaranteed obligation; (v) the unpaid guarantee fee; (v) the unpaid guarantee fee; and (v) the additional guarantee fee (in the event that the Defendant fails to perform the principal obligation within the given period, the amount calculated by multiplying the terminated guaranteed obligation by the annual rate of KRW 0,500 by the Plaintiff’s rate of KRW 50,000).

B. On April 14, 2017, subrogation B lost the benefit of time under a credit transaction agreement entered into with Nonparty bank due to the default of payment of principal debt.

Accordingly, on July 3, 2017, the Plaintiff subrogated to the non-party bank for the amount of KRW 43,377,358 (i.e., the principal amount of KRW 42,750,000, KRW 627,358). The Plaintiff spent KRW 414,636 for the preservation, transfer, and exercise of the rights acquired as a result of the performance of the guaranteed obligation.

C. On October 5, 2016, the Defendant’s establishment B of the right to collateral security (hereinafter “the right to collateral security”) between the Defendant and the Defendant, who carried on the Lando retail business under the name of F, and the real estate listed in the separate sheet owned by B.

arrow