Seoul High Court 2012Na2066 ( October 11, 2012)

(A) It is insufficient to recognize that the Defendant had held the title trust of the instant real estate to her husband.

(C) In light of the above legal principles, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the title trust of the real estate property of this case. The court below did not err by misapprehending the legal principles as to the title trust of the real estate of this case and failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations.

2012Da203034 Revocation of Fraudulent Act

Korea

KimA

Seoul High Court Decision 2012Na2066 Decided October 11, 2012

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

All of the records of this case and the judgment of the court below and the grounds of appeal by appellant were examined, but their arguments on the grounds of appeal by appellant are not included in the grounds provided by each subparagraph of Article 4(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure for Appeal, and they are dismissed pursuant to Article 5 of the above Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by

Reference materials.

If the grounds for final appeal are not included in the grounds of appeal that make it appropriate for the court of final appeal to become a legal trial, such as matters concerning significant violation of Acts and subordinate statutes, etc., the system of final appeal will not continue to proceed with the deliberation on the merits of the grounds for final appeal, but will not proceed with the deliberation on the merits of the grounds for final