beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
annex . of claim.
Reasons
1. The grounds for this part of the judgment of the court of first instance are the corresponding part of the judgment.
The term "each real estate listed in the attached list" shall be "each real estate listed in the attached list (hereinafter referred to as "each real estate of this case")", and the term "the establishment registration of a neighboring mortgage" shall be "the establishment registration of a neighboring mortgage (hereinafter referred to as "the establishment registration of a neighboring mortgage of this case")", and C.
Paragraph 2) B’s small property at the time of the conclusion of the aforementioned mortgage contract is identical to the corresponding part of the judgment of the first instance, except for the following: “B’s small property at the time of the conclusion of the aforementioned mortgage contract: (a) the secured debt under the name of D Co., Ltd. established at the time of the purchase of each of the instant real property; (b) the secured debt of KRW 759,255,615 (the maximum amount of claims KRW 90 million); and (c) the obligation of KRW 150,000,000 to C Bank.”
2. Determination as to the cause of action
A. 1) The establishment of a preserved claim requires that, in principle, a claim that may be protected by the obligee’s right of revocation was created prior to the occurrence of an act that could be viewed as a fraudulent act. However, there is a high probability as to the existence of a legal relationship that has already been based on the establishment of a claim at the time of the fraudulent act, and that the claim should be established in the near future. In a case where a claim has been established as a result of realizing the probability in the near future, the claim may also become a preserved claim of the obligee’s right of revocation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 95Da27905, Nov. 28, 1995; 2004Da40955, Nov. 12, 2004). However, the Plaintiff concluded a mortgage contract of this case on or before Apr. 19, 2018, which was concluded on or before December 17, 2016 with a credit guarantee agreement with the Plaintiff.