beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal and the conjunctive claim added in the trial are all dismissed.
2. After an appeal is filed.
Reasons
1. The reasoning of the judgment on the main claim is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, this part of the judgment is cited pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure
2. Judgment on the conjunctive claim
A. The Plaintiff asserted that “the Defendant’s credit against C is merely a loan of KRW 27.4 million, and the part exceeding KRW 27.4 million out of a mortgage contract or a registration of mortgage creation between the Defendant and C constitutes a fraudulent act detrimental to the Plaintiff, which is the creditor. Therefore, the Plaintiff asserts that “the secured amount of mortgage registration completed D with a mortgage receipt number on February 13, 2017 should be changed to KRW 27.4 million.”
B. If, with the knowledge that the obligor would prejudice the obligee, the obligor may file a claim by means of filing a lawsuit against the court for the revocation of the fraudulent act, and cannot be asserted by means of an attack or defense in the lawsuit.
(See Supreme Court Decision 92Da11008 Decided January 26, 1993, etc.). However, the Plaintiff’s assertion is rejected on the ground that the Plaintiff is seeking the restoration of the original state while adding the conjunctive claim at the trial, and does not seek the revocation of the fraudulent act as a lawsuit ( further, even though the Plaintiff claims that C is insolvent and that the establishment of a mortgage contract or the establishment of a mortgage is a fraudulent act at the time of the registration of the establishment of a mortgage, there is no evidence to acknowledge that C was a fraudulent act. Rather, according to the written evidence No. 7, it is only acknowledged that there was a balance of approximately KRW 30 million in the account of C around February 13, 2017. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s claim should be dismissed on the grounds that all of the Plaintiff’s claim is without merit.
The judgment of the court of first instance, which dismissed the plaintiff's primary claim, is justifiable in conclusion, so it is with the plaintiff's appeal.