Revocation of Fraudulent Act

With respect to the exercise of the defendants' rights by subrogation, such as restitution of unjust enrichment, etc., the name of the real estate in this case against the defendants does not have any legal ground.

Article 406 of the Civil Act

1. 피고 주식회사 ●●●에 대한 이 사건 소 중 부당이득 반환청구 부분을 각하한다. 2. 원고의 피고 ◆◆◆◆ 주식회사, 주식회사 ◇◇◇◇◇, 주식회사 *******에 대한 청구, 피고 주식회사 ●●●에 대한 나머지 청구를 모두 기각한다.

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

청 구 취 지1. 피고 주식회사 ●●●, ◆◆◆◆ 주식회사, 주식회사 ◇◇◇◇◇는 연대하여 원고에게 4,833,083,198원 및 이에 대하여 2011. 10. 18.부터 이 사건 청구취지 및 청구원인 변경신청서부본 송달일까지는 연 5%의, 그 다음날부터 다 갚는 날까지는 연 20%의 각 비율로 계산한 돈을 지급하라.

2. 피고 주식회사 ●●●, ◆◆◆◆ 주식회사, 주식회사 ******* 사이에 체결된 - 3 - 2010. 3. 26.자 신탁약정을 취소하고, 피고 주식회사 *******은 별지 목록 제1 항 기재 부동산 중 1/2 지분은 피고 주식회사 ●●●에게, 나머지 1/2 지분은 피고 기흥개발 주식회사에게 각 사해행위취소로 인한 원상회복을 원인으로 한 소유권이전등기절차를 이행하라.

3. The cancellation of each trust agreement between the Defendant Do○-gu Co., Ltd., the Defendant Dokdong Co., Ltd. and the Defendant Co., Ltd.,*******, the cancellation of each trust agreement on July 25, 201, October 28, 201, and November 1, 201, and the Defendant Co., Ltd.*********** the ownership share in each real estate listed in the separate sheet 2 through 25 to the Defendant Dokdong Co., Ltd., and the remainder of 1/2 to the Defendant Co., Ltd. for restoration due to the cancellation of each fraudulent act.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff’s taxation claim ○○○○○○ Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “○○○○○○○”) did not pay national taxes of KRW 186,630,540 for the amount of value-added tax of KRW 23,394,501,88,508,284,287,280 for the year 2002 when he owns a building and site (hereinafter referred to as “advance”) within 21,22 buildings and housing sites in Yongsan-gu, Yongsan-gu, Seoul and engaged in real estate lease business while operating real estate lease business (hereinafter referred to as “advance”). The amount of delinquent national taxes of KRW 23,394,81,50,50 for the Plaintiff by January 6, 2015 is the total amount of delinquent taxes of KRW 28,504,508,500 for the year 2002.

(b) The share of all co-owners, including the share of the entire real estate in the separate sheet (Defendant Co., Ltd.******(hereinafter referred to as the "Defendant's real estate trust"), and hereinafter referred to as the "real estate in this case").

- the progress of the discretionary auction procedure with respect to 4-

1) ■■■■ 주식회사(이하 '■■■■'이라 한다)는 별지 목록 제1항 기재 부동산 지분 전부(피고 *******의 지분을 포함한 공유자 전체의 지분, 이하 '이 사건 토지'라 한다) 및 그 지상 건물인 별지 목록 제2 내지 25항 기재 부동산 지분 전부(피고 *******의 지분을 포함한 공유자 전체의 지분, 이하 '이 사건 건물'이라 하고, 이 사건 토지와 이 사건 건물을 합하여 '이 사건 부동산'이라 한다)를 소유하고 있었고, ■■■■의 대표이사였던 ▽▽▽과 ○○○○의 대표이사 △△△은 형제지간이다.

2) ○○○○은 ■■■■의 채무를 연대보증하였는데, 1997. 11.경 외환위기 당시 ■■■■은 도산상태에 이르렀고, ○○○○ 역시 1998. 2. 연쇄적으로 도산상태에 이르렀다.

3) ■■■■의 채권자이자 이 사건 부동산의 근저당권자인 주식회사 국민은행(이하 '국민은행'이라 한다)의 신청에 의해 1999. 10. 27. 이 사건 부동산에 관하여 임의경매절차가 개시되었고(이후 채권자 한국자산관리공사의 신청에 의한 중복 경매개시결정이 있었다), 위 경매절차에서 ☆☆, ★★★(이하 '☆☆ 등'이라 한다)은 최고가매수신고를 하여 2001. 11. 15. 경매법원으로부터 매각대금 10,200,060,000원에 낙찰허가결정을 받았다(위 경매절차에서 작성된 감정평가서상 2000. 1. 18. 기준 이 사건 부동산의 시가는 23,592,782,060원이었다).

4) ■■■■은 2002. 11. 8. 국민은행의 이 사건 부동산에 관한 근저당권부 피담보채권을 양수한 국민제일차유동화전문 유한회사(이하 '국민제일차유동화전문회사'라 한다)와 사이에 근저당권설정계약을 해지하고, 2002. 11. 19. 그 명의의 근저당권설정등기를 말소한 다음 국민은행(국민제일차유동화전문회사)의 신청에 따른 임의경매개시

- 5- An objection to the ruling was raised, and the auction court revoked the ruling on November 22, 2002 and dismissed the application for auction by the National Bank (National First Special Purpose Company).

5) 또한 ■■■■은 한국자산관리공사와 사이에, 아래 다.의 2)항 기재와 같이 2002. 11. 5. 주식회사 ∞∞∞에이엠씨(이하 '∞∞∞'이라 한다)를 통하여 한국자산관 리공사에게 조정된 채무액 22,690,429,667원 중 14,719,059,764원을 변제하고, 나머지 채무액은 ∞∞∞이 2004. 11. 5.까지 8회에 걸쳐 분할하여 대위변제하기로 하는 약정을 체결하였고, ∞∞∞과 사이에 ∞∞∞이 한국자산관리공사로부터 양수한 14,592,000,000원의 채권에 대한 변제기를 2004. 11. 4.까지로 유예하는 내용의 약정을 체결하였다. ■■■■이 위와 같은 내용의 변제유예증서를 제출하면서 한국자산관 리공사의 신청에 따른 경매개시결정에 대해 이의를 신청하자, 경매법원은 2003. 2. 7. 한국자산관리공사의 경매신청을 각하하였다. 이에 대하여 낙찰자인 ☆☆ 등이 항고, 재항고하였으나, 모두 기각되었다.

6) 그러나 위 경매신청 각하결정 이전인 2002. 11. 22. ■■■■의 채권자 김인성의 신청에 의하여 이 사건 부동산에 관한 임의경매개시결정이 내려졌고, 2003. 2. 3.과 2003. 4. 11. 채권자 이춘복, 권영남의 신청에 의하여 이 사건 부동산에 관한 각 강제경매개시결정이 내려져 이 사건 부동산에 대한 경매절차는 계속 진행되었다.

7) 이후 ■■■■은 김인성의 이 사건 부동산에 관한 근저당권부 피담보채권의 양수인인 ※※※를 피공탁자로 하여 500,000,000원을 공탁하고 근저당권설정등기 말소청구의 소를 제기한 후 위 임의경매절차에 대해 정지신청을 하여 인용결정을 받았으나, 2003. 12. 24. 위 근저당권설정등기 말소청구의 소를 취하하였다(이에 따라 이 사건 부동산에 관한 임의경매절차는 계속 진행되었다. 이하 '이 사건 경매절차'라 한다).

- 6- On the other hand, Lee Young-nam withdrawn each of the above applications for compulsory auction on the instant real estate on September 20, 2004, and on May 8, 2006.

(c) The execution and circumstances of a sales contract for the price of a ship on board;

1) ○○○○은 2002. 7.경 ∞∞∞에게 선인상가를 매매대금 140,000,000,000원에 매도하되, 그 중 일부(22,700,000,000원 상당)를 ∞∞∞이 한국자산관리공사에 대한 서울제강의 채무를 대위변제하는 방법으로 지급하고, 대신 ∞∞∞이 한국자산관리공사로부터 위 변제액 상당의 이 사건 부동산에 관한 근저당권부 피담보채권을 양도받으며, ○○○○은 ∞∞∞에게 위 근저당권부 피담보채권에 대한 관리를 위탁하고 ○○○○이 지정하는 시기에 ○○○○ 또는 ○○○○이 지정하는 제3자에게 위 근저당권부 피담보채권을 양도하기로 하는 매매계약을 체결하였다.

2) ∞∞∞은 2002. 11. 5. 위 매매계약에 따라 한국자산관리공사에게 조정된 채무액 22,690,429,667원 중 14,719,059,764원을 변제하였고, 2002. 11. 8. 한국자산관리공사로부터 이 사건 부동산에 관한 채권최고액 합계 14,700,000,000원(= 13,972,944,754원 + 미화 500,000달러) 상당의 근저당권부 피담보채권을 양수하였다(이하 ∞∞∞이 한국자산관리공사로부터 양수한 이 사건 부동산에 관한 근저당권부 피담보채권을 '이 사건 근저당권부 피담보채권'이라 한다).

3) ∞∞∞은 2002. 11. 14. 주식회사 부림상호저축은행(이하 '부림저축은행'이라 한다) 외 5개 저축은행에게 이 사건 근저당권부 피담보채권에 관한 질권을 설정하여 주고 6,000,000,000원을 대출받았고, ▽▽▽의 지시에 따라 2004. 4. 9. 이 사건 근저당권부 피담보채권 중 ******에게 9,200,000,000원 상당의, ☆☆의 처남인 정재 호에게 4,300,000,000원 상당의 채권을 양도하였다.

- - Other

4)***** on August 17, 2004, transferred to the Forest Savings Bank and Ansan Mutual Savings Bank (hereinafter referred to as the “Yansan Savings Bank”) the claims equivalent to KRW 3,486,500,000 out of the secured claims of the instant collateral security interest, and received loans from the said Savings Bank KRW 4,00,000,000.

D. Conclusion of a sales contract for the instant real estate

1) ■■■■은 2003. 11. 26. 이 사건 경매절차의 낙찰자인 ☆☆ 등과 사이에 이 사건 부동산에 관하여, 매도인 ☆☆ 등, 매수인 ■■■■으로 하는 내용의 매매계약을 체결하였는데, 그 매매대금은 ☆☆ 등이 낙찰 허가받은 10,200,600,000원에 추가로 2,300,000,000원을 더한 12,500,600,000원으로 하되, 그 중 9,180,540,000원은 서울 제강이 ☆☆ 등을 대신하여 경매법원에 낙찰잔금을 납입하는 방법으로 지급하고, 추가로 지급하기로 한 2,300,000,000원과 ☆☆ 등이 이미 경매법원에 납입한 입찰보증금 1,020,060,000원의 합계 3,320,060,000원은 그 금액의 한도 내에서 이 사건 근저당권부 피담보채권(∞∞∞ 명의, 최우선순위 근저당권)을 이전받는 것으로 그 지급을 갈음하며, 소유권이전등기는 ☆☆ 등 명의로 이전등기가 마쳐지는 즉시 ■■■■ 또는 서울제강이 지정하는 제3자 명의로 마치기로 약정하였다(이하 '이 사건 매매계약'이라 한다).

2) ■■■■은 이 사건 매매계약 체결일에 이 사건 부동산의 소유권이전등기를 이전받을 자를 피고 주식회사 ●●●(이하 '피고 ●●●'라 한다)와 피고 주식회사 씨에 스아이(이하 '피고 ◇◇◇◇◇'라 한다)로 지정하였고, 이에 따라 ☆☆ 등은 부동산 매수인을 피고 ●●●, ◇◇◇◇◇로 기재한 부동산매도용 인감증명서를 발급받아 이 사건 매매계약 체결에 관여한 김철완 변호사에게 교부하였다.

3) On August 16, 2004, as to the instant real estate between the Defendant and the Seoul Metropolitan Government, etc.

- 8- The head of the Si/Gun/Gu shall, within two months from the time the transfer of ownership is completed in the name of the Si/Gun/Gu, or

It is promised that the registration of ownership transfer should be completed to a person designated by the agency, if any.

The case where the Defendant fails to fully pay the purchase price to the Docdong, etc.

An objection may be raised even if the △△, etc. disposes of the instant real estate at will.

I have drawn up a letter of commitment to refuse to do so.

4) The day he received KRW 500,000,000 from the Defendant Kim Dong-dong on the same day, and the above day he received KRW 50,000.

다.의 3)항과 같이 ∞∞∞이 한국자산관리공사로부터 이전받은 이 사건 근저당권부 채

The auction procedure of this case on September 17, 2004

의 배당절차에서 2,075,333,880원을 배당받았다. 또한 ■■■■과 ※※※ 사이의 협의

에 따라 ※※※가 위 배당절차에서 배당받은 500,000,000원도 ☆☆ 등이 지급받음으

As a result, KRW 3,075,33,880 out of the purchase price under the instant sales contract (= KRW 500,000,000) +

was paid KRW 2,075,33,880 + 500,000,000).

5) 피고 ◇◇◇◇◇의 대표이사 ▲▲▲은 2004. 8. 18. 자신을 채무자로, ☆☆ 등

corporation, Dongbu Mutual Savings Bank (hereinafter referred to as "Dongbu Mutual Savings Bank"), which has secured the real estate of this case as security.

of 6,427,821,114 out of loans of 7,000,000 won from the Dong Savings Bank (hereinafter referred to as the "Dong Savings Bank").

Won and the above C. 4) ***** A loan extended from the Gelim Savings Bank, etc.*

Among the 2,757,749,318 won in total, the award in this case shall be awarded in subrogation of △△, etc. in the auction procedure.

The remainder amount of KRW 9,180,540,000 was paid (the actual payment is KRW 9,185,570,432).

6) As above, when the successful bid price for the instant real estate was paid in full, Do governor, etc. on August 2004

19. Upon completion of the registration of transfer of ownership on the instant real estate, the same date and the same register stated in paragraph (3).

Maximum debt amount of 10,500,000,000 won and the debtor to secure the loan obligations of the Livestock Bank;

- 9-

The establishment registration of a mortgage in the name of the Dong Savings Bank was completed.

E. The Defendants’ transfer of ownership to the instant real estate

1) ■■■■이 2004. 12. 4. 상법 제520조의2 제1항에 따라 해산되어 그 법인등기

A. On December 28, 2004, the representative director died, and the head of the Gu/Si/Gun Council, etc., shall be Do Governor Do Governor and Do Governor, etc.

에스아이의 소유권이전등기청구권을 부인하면서 이 사건 부동산에 관하여 ■■■■ 명

It is argued that the registration of transfer of ownership will be completed only by medical services. Accordingly, the defendant Lee Dong-dong, the Republic of Korea, May 2005.

19. Seoul Northern District Court Decision 2005No. 1884, 2005, the details of the consideration for the operation of the Si/Gun/Gu, and the ownership;

The documents required for the registration of transfer are clearly stated as the "delivery of all documents required for the registration of transfer".

Of KRW 3,320,060,000, the amount of KRW 3,075,33,880 already received by the △△△, etc. shall be deducted.

The remainder 244,726,120 won (=3,320,060,000 won - 3,075,333,880 won) was deposited.

2) 한편 동부저축은행은 ▲▲▲에 대한 2004. 8. 18.자 대출금채권을 회수하기 위

on November 28, 2005, a voluntary auction on the instant real estate was applied for, and on November 28, 2005, the instant real estate.

The voluntary auction was commenced on December 29, 2005. The Dong Savings Bank shall be DBB Co., Ltd. on December 29, 2005.

B(hereinafter referred to as "DB") transferred the above collateral loan to MC, and Do Do dong.

등은 2006. 3. 17. ▲▲▲의 디비에이엠씨에 대한 채무원리금 8,080,189,721원을 대위

The reimbursement was made.

3) The Defendant Aneaero owns one-half of the real estate in this case against the △△, etc.

On June 16, 2006, by filing a lawsuit for the registration of transfer of jurisdiction (Seoul Central District Court 2005Gahap93524)

An appeal (Seoul High Court 2006Na61392) and an appeal by the Do governor, etc., in favor of the winning court.

(Supreme Court Decision 2007Da51024). However, all appeals and final appeals were dismissed, and the judgment above was dismissed.

was finally determined as follows.

- 10 -

5) The Defendant △△△△△△ may own the ownership of 1/2 shares of the instant real estate against △△△, etc.

A reasonable amount of rent from the time of the implementation of the pre-registration procedure and the full payment of the purchase price to the time of registration of ownership transfer.

액의 부당이득을 구하는 소송을 제기하였고, 위 소송에서 ☆☆ 등은 ▲▲▲의 대출원

A counterclaim was filed to seek return of unjust enrichment on the ground that the person subrogated for a debt of interest.

[Seoul Central District Court 2006Gahap63292 (principal lawsuit), 2007Gahap70913 (Counterclaim)] The above court

9. 18. The appeal court accepted all of the claims filed by the Defendant Do governor Do governor Do governor Do governor and Do governor Do governor Do governor.

[Seoul High Court 2009Da42130 (main lawsuit), 42147 (Counterclaim)] A set-off objection by the defendant Dou Dou-gu

part of each claim for money between the principal lawsuit and the counterclaim shall be changed, and the remainder shall be the first instance judgment.

The decision was maintained as it is, and the appeal was dismissed on October 14, 2009, and the judgment of the above appellate court is without merit.

was finally determined.

6) In accordance with each of the above rulings, the defendant Dolle Dolle Dolle Dolle is Dolle Dolle, October 21, 2009, and the defendant Dokdong

16. Each of the instant real estates completed the registration of ownership transfer relating to one-half shares (12,699/25,398) among the instant real estates.

7) On December 18, 2008, as part of the instant real estate, the Defendant CS, among the instant real estate was divided into the Republic of Korea and Japan.

"아이의 지분은 피고 ◆◆◆◆ 주식회사(이하피고 ◆◆◆◆'이라 한다)에게 모두 이전",되었고, 이에 따라 2008. 12. 29. 이 사건 부동산 중 피고 ◇◇◇◇◇의 위 지분에 관

하여 피고 ◆◆◆◆ 명의의 소유권이전등기가 마쳐졌다.

8) 그 후 피고 ●●●, ◆◆◆◆은 이 사건 토지에 관하여 2010. 3. 26.자 신탁을

As to the building of this case, each of the trusts of this case as of July 25, 201, October 28, 201

As to the instant real estate, the ownership of the said Defendants’ share in the instant real estate is a defendant corporation

The trust (hereinafter referred to as "Defendant**********) has been entirely transferred on March 2010.

26. As to the instant land, the Defendant regarding the instant building on July 26, 201 and November 1, 2011

- 11 -

******** the transfer of ownership has been completed in the name.

[Ground of Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 13, Eul evidence 2, Eul evidence 1

Statement (including each number), the purport of the whole pleading

2. Summary of the plaintiff's assertion

가. 피고 ●●●, ◇◇◇◇◇, ◆◆◆◆에 대한 청구

1) ▽▽▽과 △△△은, ■■■■의 채권자인 한국자산관리공사의 요청으로 연대보

증인인 ○○○○이 선인상가를 매각하여 ■■■■의 한국자산관리공사에 대한 채무를

in order to compensate for losses suffered by discharge, the representative director of the Dou Dou, the representative director of the Dou, and

운영자 ▼▼▼(이하 '◎◎◎ 형제'이라 한다), 피고 ◇◇◇◇◇의 대표이사 ▲▲▲(이하

In collusion with such five persons, including the above ▽▽▽▽▽△△, etc., the purchase price of a person on a personal basis shall be used in collusion with such persons.

The respondent, who is a Dormant Company with the family members and relatives of △△△△, etc. from such △△△, etc.

In order to purchase the instant real estate in the name of Do○○ and the Defendant Kim Dong-dong.

However, the sales price of the instant real estate in the amount of KRW 12,500,600,000,000 for the purchase price of the instant real estate

Amount paid as the secured claim of the instant collateral security (=Sti) at least KRW 4,833,083,198

이티씨가 ∞∞∞으로부터 이전받은 3,486,700,000원의 이 사건 근저당권부 피담보채권

4,000,000,000

2,757,749,318 + The instant right to collateral security of KRW 4,300,000 taken over by the Ministry of Environment in the Republic of Korea in the Republic of Korea of △△△△△

As to the secured claim of this case, the amount of dividends in the auction procedure of this case reaches KRW 2,075,33,880.

2) Therefore, the aforementioned act, such as the ▽▽▽△, etc., committed an embezzlement in collusion with the funds of ○○○○○○○○.

As such, the ○○○○○ is a tort, such as a resignation, and thus, the actual involvement of the △△△△△△△△, etc. and the competitor.

인 ◎◎◎ 형제, ▲▲▲, △△△의 사촌인 김재훈이 대표이사로 있는 피고 ●●●, 씨

- 12-

에스아이, ◆◆◆◆에 대하여 불법행위를 원인으로 한 손해배상채권을 갖는다.

3) 한편 이 사건 부동산의 실질적 매수인은 ■■■■이 아닌 피고 ●●●, 씨에스

아이(◆◆◆◆)인데, 위 피고들은 아무런 법률상 원인 없이 ○○○○의 자금(선인상가

The ownership of the instant real estate was acquired by using KRW 4,83,083,198.

로, ○○○○은 피고 ●●●, ◇◇◇◇◇, ◆◆◆◆에 대하여 위 금액의 부당이득금 반

shall have a claim for exchange.

In addition, the registration of transfer of ownership in the name of the said Defendants was made with the funds of ▽▽○○○○, etc.

this title trust agreement is deemed to have been entered into an implied title trust agreement, and such title trust agreement shall not be deemed to have been

Since the above Defendants are effective, they return unjust enrichment amounting to KRW 4,83,083,198 against ○○○○○.

have an obligation to take place.

4) 설령 ○○○○의 피고 ●●●, ◇◇◇◇◇, ◆◆◆◆에 대한 손해배상채권이나

Even if a claim for return of unjust enrichment is not recognized, the ○○○○○ is the Defendant ○○, the Rural Community, or

◆◆◆◆에게 명시적 또는 묵시적으로 위 매매대금 상당액을 대여하기로 합의하였거

B. Since ○○○○○ invested the above purchase price, ○○○○○ is against the above Defendants.

any loan or investment bond shall be issued.

5) The Plaintiff’s taxation claim against ○○○○, who is a tax claim, ○○○○, on behalf of the Defendant ○○○.

에스아이, ◆◆◆◆에 대하여 위 4,833,083,198원 및 그에 대한 지연손해금의 지급을

Therefore, the defendants are obliged to pay the above money to the plaintiff.

(b) Defendant******** Claim against*

●●●, ◆◆◆◆은 채무초과 상태에서 유일한 재산인 이 사건 부동산에 관

one share was trusted to Defendant*******, which is a creditor, prejudicial to ○○○○, a creditor.

- 13-

It constitutes a fraudulent act, and the defendant********'s bad faith is presumed to be a beneficiary.

Therefore, ○○○○○’s exercise of the right of revocation of fraudulent act**** by subrogation of ○○○○○*

하는 원고의 청구에 따라, 피고 ●●●, ◆◆◆◆과 피고 *******과 사이에

A trust agreement on the instant land concluded on March 26, 2010, July 25, 2011, and October 28, 201

The trust agreement on the building of this case must be revoked in its entirety, and defendant********

회복으로 피고 ●●●, ◆◆◆◆에게 각 이 사건 부동산 중 피고 ******* 명의

There is an obligation to implement procedures for the registration of ownership transfer with respect to one-half of the shares in the shares.

3. Determination on this safety defense

A. Summary of the main safety defense by the Defendant ○○○○

○○○○○, the Plaintiff’s obligor, was Seoul Western District Court 2014Gahap3467, and Defendant Vienna

Inasmuch as the plaintiff was ruled against E in a lawsuit claiming restitution of unjust enrichment, the plaintiff's avoid

10 6 6 6 6 6 60 6 6 6 6 6222

section is applicable to the case where the debtor has already exercised his/her right in court, and the source which is the creditor

the debtor's exercise of the debtor's right on behalf of the debtor and it is unlawful.

shall change.

B. Determination

In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the statement No. 1 by Eul, ○○, the Defendant

Dou-gu Seoul Western District Court 2014Kahap3467, Stately owned by the Defendant Dou-gu

A right to the proceeds from the use and disposal of the instant real property to ○○○.

At preliminary, approximately KRW 4,775,000,000 out of the purchase price of the sales contract of this case was confirmed as a preliminary price

Since the sale price was paid, the defendant ○○○ shall be deemed as unjust enrichment.

- 14 -

Action for confirmation of earnings with the content of "return of 4,775,000,000 won and damages for delay thereon"

On November 14, 2014, the court below's primary claim by ○○○ on November 14, 2014 has no benefit of confirmation.

In respect of the preliminary claim, "the purchase price of the sales contract of this case" is dismissed on the ground that it is legitimate.

In the instant case where approximately KRW 4,775,000,000 was acquired by ○○○ in lieu of the purchase price of a prior merchant

The fact that money was derived from the secured claim on real property is recognized, but Defendant Vienna

T. The sale of this case, which is a contract for a third party, for the acquisition of ownership of the real property in this case

The reason is that "it shall not be deemed that benefits have been acquired without any legal ground" as it is based on a contract.

The dismissal of ○○○○ filed an appeal with Seoul High Court 2014Na6082.

In the above appellate court, the defendant's previous primary and preliminary claims are stated to ○○○.

433,500,000 won and any proceeds therefrom from the use and disposal of the real property in this case owned by ○○○○

Any change in exchange only with the claim of the revenue that the damages for delay shall be paid.

may be determined.

According to the above facts of recognition, ○○○, the debtor, had already been filed against the defendant ○○.

A judicial right by filing a lawsuit with the same content as the claim for restitution of unjust enrichment

As such, the part asserting that the title trust agreement is null and void is not an attack and defense method.

(C) The plaintiff, on behalf of the defendant ○○○, sought the payment of unjust enrichment from the defendant ○○.

There is no eligibility to do so, and the principal security defense of the defendant ○○○○ is reasonable.

In addition, ○○○○○ amends the purport of the claim in the above appellate trial by exchanging it in an exchange.

Article 267(2) of the Civil Procedure Act withdraws a claim for return of the conjunctive unjust enrichment by a claimant for deliberation.

the same lawsuit has not been filed against the person who has withdrawn the lawsuit subsequent to the final judgment on the merits of the case.

C. Since ○○○○ provides that the sales of the instant real estate against the Defendant ○○○, the sales of the instant real estate

- 15 -

The subject matter of lawsuit and the protection of rights are sought for unjust enrichment against the sales price of the prepaid family members used in gold.

The following is identical and is not allowed because it is against the prohibition of re-litigation.

4,775,00,000 won in the amount of the claim for unjust enrichment claimed by ○○○ in 2014 Ghana3467

Although the amount of the instant case is somewhat different from the instant case, it was used as the sales price of the instant real estate.

Loans secured by secured claims acquired as well as secured claims secured by the right to collateral security, not only in money of the purchase price of the prior merchant but also in money

This result from the failure to clearly specify that the money received has been made;

In the above case, the above amount of KRW 4,775,00,000 is not explicitly claimed as part of the claim.

(B) The subject matter of the instant lawsuit and the instant lawsuit (hereinafter referred to as the “instant lawsuit”) are identical. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s ○○○○

Part on subrogation of a claim for return of unjust enrichment by ○○○’s Defendant on the lawsuit against Defendant ○○○.

of this chapter, in any manner, is deemed unlawful.

4. Judgment on the merits

가. 피고 ●●●, ◇◇◇◇◇, ◆◆◆◆에 대한 청구에 관한 판단

○○○○이 피고 ●●●, ◇◇◇◇◇, ◆◆◆◆에 대하여 원고가 주장하는 바와 같

In this case, damages claim, unjust enrichment return claim, loan, or investment deposit claim due to this tort shall have

We examine whether the claim for return of unjust enrichment against the defendant ○○○ by the defendant ○○ may be claimed by subrogation.

Since the part sought is inappropriate as seen earlier, determination as to the claim for return of unjust enrichment is made.

◇◇◇◇◇, ◆◆◆◆에만 해당한다).

1) The purport of the whole pleadings is as follows: evidence Nos. 10-1 to 8, evidence No. 11, and evidence No. 14

종합하면, 피고 ◇◇◇◇◇의 주식은 △△△의 가족들이 47%, ▲▲▲이 25% 보유하

고 있고, △△△의 친척이자 피고 ◆◆◆◆의 대표이사인 김재훈이 이사로, △△△의

처 윤영숙이 감사로 재직하고 있는 사실, ▽▽▽은 ■■■■ 및 ○○○○의 대표이사

- 16 -

로, △△△은 ○○○○의 대표이사, ■■■■의 감사, 피고 ◇◇◇◇◇의 대표이사 내

지 감사, ******의 감사로, ▲▲▲은 피고 ◇◇◇◇◇, 피고 ●●●의 대표이사

로 각 재직한 바 있는 사실, 피고 ◆◆◆◆의 대표이사 김재훈은 △△△의 친척인 사

According to the above facts, the successful bid price of the real estate of this case is recognized and determined as above.

9,180,540,00 won 2,757,749,318 out of KRW 9,757,749,318****

the secured claim on the real property of this case as security and loans granted as security;

The secured claim of the above collateral is paid to the purchaser, and the sale price of the secured claim of the right to collateral security was sold to the purchaser.

의 지급에 갈음하여 ∞∞∞이 한국자산관리공사에 ■■■■의 채무를 대위변제하고 한

The acquisition from the State Property Management Corporation, and the registration of the Republic of Korea in the area of the Si/Gun/Gu in the case of this case

2,075,33,880 won, which was distributed in the auction procedure, shall be the place where the purchase price of the real estate in this case is made.

급에 갈음하여 ∞∞∞이 한국자산관리공사로부터 이전받은 이 사건 부동산에 관한 근

of the secured claims in the mortgage register, which shall be acquired in the name of the

4,833,083,198 won seems to have been paid out of the purchase price of the deceased and wounded.

2) However, the above evidence and Gap evidence No. 14 together with the purport of the whole pleadings.

In light of the following circumstances known to the public, ① the aforementioned circumstances alone are solely based on the following circumstances.

공모하여 선인상가 매각대금을 횡령하였다거나, ▲▲▲, ◎◎◎ 형제가 ▽▽▽, △△△

A person who actively participated in embezzlement or breach of trust against ○○○○○

인산업의 피고 ●●●, ◆◆◆◆, ◇◇◇◇◇에 대한 불법행위채권은 인정할 수 없고,

② The acquisition of the ownership of the instant real estate by Defendant Aneaeaeaea shall take place for a third party.

4,833,083,198 won out of the sales price of a prestigious shop, as a prestigious contract of this case

이 사건 부동산의 매수대금으로 사용되었다는 사정만으로 피고 ◇◇◇◇◇, ◆◆◆◆

- 17 -

No benefit equivalent to the above 4,83,083,198 won shall be deemed to have been obtained without any legal ground under this Act;

원고가 제출한 증거들만으로는 ▽▽▽, △△△과 ▲▲▲ 사이에 내부적으로는 선인상

The ownership of the real estate of this case, which was acquired through the sales price of the Defendant Geedong, to ○○○.

(1) The title of registration shall be vested in the Republic of Korea, but the title of registration shall be entrusted to the Republic of Korea, the Republic of Korea

It is insufficient to recognize that there has been a consignment agreement, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it, so the ship does not have any other evidence.

인산업의 피고 ◇◇◇◇◇, ◆◆◆◆에 대한 부당이득금 반환채권도 인정되지 않는다.

③ 또한 ○○○○이 피고 ●●●, ◇◇◇◇◇, ◆◆◆◆에게 선인상가의 매각대금을 이

Any evidence to acknowledge that the real estate was lent or invested as the purchase price of the real estate in this case

없으므로, ○○○○의 피고 ●●●, ◇◇◇◇◇, ◆◆◆◆에 대한 대여금 또는 투자금

No claim may also be recognized. Accordingly, the plaintiff's claim shall be accepted.

◇◇◇◇◇, ◆◆◆◆에 대한 청구는 모두 이유 없다.

A) In general, the intent of the parties to the contract shall be the transaction party to the person named in the nominal owner of the contract.

Inasmuch as the intent to conclude the contract is deemed as private interest, barring any special circumstance, such intent shall be deemed to be the intention to conclude the contract.

명의자가 계약당사자가 된다. 이 사건 매매계약서상 매수인은 '■■■■'이라고 명시적

The contents of the instant sales contract, and the process of conclusion, as seen earlier, are stated in the facts.

및 이행과정에 비추어 보면, ■■■■은 ☆☆ 등과 사이에 이 사건 매매계약을 통하여

☆☆ 등이 경매절차에서 경락받은 이 사건 부동산의 소유권을 ■■■■ 또는 ■■■■

The sales contract of this case is agreed to receive and transfer the purchase price to the designated person.

A person who is entitled to receive the registration of transfer of ownership shall be designated as defendant Dok-gu and defendant Dok-gu.

It appears that the above Defendants were the beneficiary of the contract for the third party. In addition, this case was also concluded.

매매계약 체결 당시 매수인을 ■■■■으로 한 이유는, 이 사건 매매계약의 내용, 그

- 18 -

이행과정 및 매매대금의 지급경위에 비추어 볼 때, ■■■■이 이 사건 부동산의 실권

Because of interest, not because of interest, it was an existing owner of the instant real estate, and thus, the instant real estate.

The state of maintaining the status of successful bidders, etc. after resolving complicated legal relations, such as lease;

에서 ■■■■과 ☆☆ 등 사이에 있었던 종전의 법적 분쟁을 종결시키기 위한 방법이

It appears to have been the actual owner of the instant real property, and the number of the executive branch of the instant real property, the

so that the ownership may be attributed to the defendant Dok-gu, the Republic of Korea, Dok-gu.

Therefore, it also accords with the substantive legal relationship.

B) The Plaintiff recognized the existence and content of the instant sales contract in accordance with its language and text.

Supreme Court Decision 2014Da645 Decided June 26, 2014

Although the above Supreme Court ruling 1415 citeds 14115, the above Supreme Court ruling clearly shows the objective meaning of the language and text.

the buyer in the sales contract is a matter of interpreting the intent between the parties unless otherwise specified in the contract.

'■■■■'으로 명확하게 기재되어 있는 이 사건에 적용할 것은 아니다.

다) ▲▲▲ 또는 피고 ◇◇◇◇◇는 이 사건 부동산의 낙찰대금 중 상당 부분을

I seem to have prepared themselves, that is, ① the above 2,757,749,318 won out of the successful bid 9,180,540,00 won.

을 제외한 나머지 6,422,790,682원은 피고 ◇◇◇◇◇의 대표이사인 ▲▲▲이 자신을

The debtor shall be the debtor, and the registration of ownership transfer of the real estate in this case in the status of the successful bidder.

(2) If the savings bank becomes a member of the savings bank, the savings bank shall provide it as security and take a loan from the savings bank.

돈이고, 그 채무원리금은 ☆☆ 등이 ▲▲▲을 대위하여 변제하였다. ② 이 사건 부동산

의 매각대금에 대한 배당절차에서 ※※※에게 배당되어야 할 500,000,000원이 ※※※

와 ■■■■ 사이의 합의에 따라 ☆☆ 등에게 지급되었고, ※※※는 2003. 1. 29. 서울

제강이 별도로 ※※※를 피공탁자로 하여 공탁한 500,000,000원을 출급하였는데, 이근

- 19-

of 500,000,000 won upon request by △△△△ upon receipt of an investigation by an investigative agency

련하여 서울북부지방법원에 ■■■■ 명의로 ※※※를 피공탁자로 하여 위 돈을 공탁

하였다"고 진술한 바 있으므로, 위 500,000,000원은 ▲▲▲이 마련한 것으로 보인다.

③ 또한 피고 ◇◇◇◇◇가 2004. 8. 16. ☆☆ 등에게 지급한 500,000,000원은 ▲▲▲

의 동부저축은행 계좌에서 송금된 것으로서 ▲▲▲이 마련한 것이다. ④ ▽▽▽이 사

The ownership of the Defendant Do governor and the Defendant Do governor based on the sales contract of this case, Do governor, etc.

On May 19, 2005, the Seoul Northern District Court denied the right to claim the transfer registration.

244,726,120 won on the condition that the Do governor, etc. shall deliver documents related to the registration of ownership transfer to the Do governor.

탁하였다. 위 돈은 ▲▲▲이 △△△의 협조를 얻어 △△△의 어머니의 집을 담보로 대

출받아 마련한 것으로, ■■■■이나 ○○○○의 자금은 아닌 것으로 보인다.

라) ******는 2004. 4. 9. ∞∞∞으로부터 9,200,000,000원 상당의 이 사

On August 17, 2004, the part of 3,486,500,000 won out of the acquisition by transfer of the secured claim on the sound collateral.

4,000,000,000

2,757,749,318 won was used for the successful bid price of the instant real estate. Defendant Aneaeaeaeaea has been used for the successful bid price.

9.16.16.******* and 4,000 square meters out of the real estate in this case to Do governor-General.

A sales contract to be sold to 8,800,000,000 won (which has been reduced to 8,000,000 won thereafter)

In light of the fact that the above loans paid from****** is provided free of charge.

It is difficult to readily conclude that it is the same.

마) ■■■■과 ○○○○이 도산상태에 이르렀을 무렵 선인상가에서 사업을 하

166 16 16 16 16 16 16 26 26 24

I) From September 200, 2000 to sell a normal price, and ○○○’s proceeds.

- 20 -

The work was carried out in order to pay off and earn profits. As part of the work, ① ○○○○ on April 2002

11.The auction of the sale of the Sejong Law Firm and the Salkin Price and the auction of the Salkin Price which was under way at the time of the sale

In concluding a contract to delegate legal affairs to suspend the proceedings, the chip section 201 is prior to the conclusion of the contract

In the case of a joint and several liability, the human industry has a joint and several liability to pay the remuneration for the law firm Sejong.

in the course of a meeting on legal issues related to the sale of the three categories of the corporation and the pre-sale price;

(3) around July 2002, 2002 ○○○○○.

In case where the purchase price is 136,000,000,000 won between the digital fine corporation and the corporation

관한 매매계약을 성사시키기도 하였다(매매계약서에는 공인중개사 자격이 있는 ▼▼▼

이 입회보증인으로 기재되어 있고, ▼▼▼에게 지급되는 중개수수료는 3,000,000,000

원이라고 기재되어 있다. 다만, 위 매매계약은 ▽▽▽, △△△이 ∞∞∞과 사이에 매매

The sales contract, which is set forth as KRW 140,000,000, was not concluded by the formation of the contract. Accordingly, the contract was concluded by the formation of the contract.

chipary goods, etc. made a substantial contribution to the sale of the chip goods, etc. as above, and such chip goods, etc.

The act of punishment seems to have been nothing but the acquisition of the real estate of this case.

F) Accordingly, the ownership of the instant real estate in the name of the Defendant Dou Dou or the Gandong.

The fact that the previous registration is completed is consistent with the relation of consideration, and is in fact consistent with the network ▽▽▽▽△△△△△.

A public offering or active participation and embezzlement of funds by ○○○○○, or from ○○○○.

It is difficult to see that the successful bid price for real estate was provided without compensation.

사) 검사는 △△△과 ▲▲▲에 대하여, '망 ▽▽▽, ▼▼▼, ☆☆, ★★★과 공모

in order to compensate for any loss incurred in the course of selling the pre-sale price, the pre-sale price for the pre-sale price.

by purchasing the real estate of this case from a successful bidder and returning it to a third party by using money.

Acquisition of the difference between the amount equivalent to the market price and the purchase price, and the sale price of the prestigious price is the sales price.

- 21 -

Do○○ and the executive branch of the Republic of Korea shall complete the registration of ownership transfer of the instant real estate

■■■■에게 이 사건 부동산 감정가격 236억 원 상당의 손해를 입혔다'는 내용의 공

In fact, the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Misappropriation) by the Incheon District Court 2009Gohap409

The court was prosecuted for a crime, and on January 14, 2010, concluded the instant sales contract and its execution process;

In light of the source of the sales price and the details of the payment, etc., the execution of the instant sales contract

The prosecutor appealed not guilty on the grounds that it is difficult to recognize it as a voluntary act.

U.S. High Court 2009No2524) and the final appeal (Supreme Court 2010Do1383), however, appeal and final appeal are filed.

All dismissals and the verdict of innocences became final and conclusive.

(b) Judgment on the claim against Defendant*******

원고가 ○○○○의 피고 ●●●, ◆◆◆◆에 대한 피보전채권(불법행위를 원인으

on the premise that there exists a claim for damages, a claim for return of unjust enrichment, a loan, or a claim for investment

○○○○을 대위하여 피고 *******과 피고 ●●●, ◆◆◆◆ 사이에 체결된 신

This part of the plaintiff's petition agreement is a fraudulent act and the revocation thereof is sought.

The revocation of fraudulent act against the deposit and the claim for restitution thereof shall be preserved by ○○ as mentioned above.

As long as claims are not recognized, there is no reason to view further.

4. Conclusion

If so, the part of the claim for restitution of unjust enrichment against Defendant 2 is unlawful.

이를 각하하고, 원고의 피고 ◆◆◆◆, ◇◇◇◇◇, *******에 대한 청구 및 피

1. The remainder of the claim against Do governor Do governor Do Governor is dismissed in its entirety on the ground that it is without merit.

The decision shall be rendered as above.