beta
Text
1. As to the share of 6/10 of each of the real estates listed in the separate sheet:
A. On August 21, 2014, between C and the Defendant.
Reasons
The Plaintiff loaned KRW 24 million to C on June 20, 2008, and the sales contract was concluded on August 21, 2014 between C and the Defendant as to each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet, and accordingly, the registration of transfer of the Defendant’s shares was completed on August 21, 2014 by the Incheon District Court No. 57512, which was received on August 21, 2014. At that time, C may be acknowledged by taking into account the following facts: (a) there is no dispute between the parties, or there is no particular property other than the above real estate shares; (b) the facts that there is no other property other than the real estate shares, as stated in subparagraphs 1 through 4, as a result of the order to submit the information by Bupyeong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City
C’s act of selling the sole property to the Defendant is a fraudulent act detrimental to the Plaintiff, a creditor, and C is deemed to have known that it was a fraudulent act, and the Defendant’s bad faith is presumed.
The defendant purchased each real estate listed in the attached list and registered in the name of the defendant's headquarters.
Although the Defendant alleged to the effect that he/she was duly transferred shares because he/she had been able to support C, such as monetary lending, etc., to his/her birth, but the statement in the evidence No. 3 alone is insufficient to reverse the presumption of registration, to recognize the Defendant’s substantial ownership, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it, and even if there is money that the Defendant would receive from C.
Even if the act of taking over real estate shares instead of money becomes a fraudulent act against the plaintiff, who is another creditor, and there is no evidence to recognize the defendant's good faith.
If so, the sales contract between C and the defendant should be revoked as a fraudulent act, and the defendant is obligated to implement the procedure for cancellation of the registration of the transfer of shares due to restitution to the original state, the plaintiff's claim is accepted for reasons