beta
Text
1. As to shares of 2/9 of the real estate listed in the separate sheet:
A. It was concluded on September 10, 2019 between the Defendant and G.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On December 23, 2003, G entered into an agreement on the use of a credit card with the Plaintiff and used it with the credit card issued and delayed payment from around 2005. As of February 3, 2020, G bears the Plaintiff’s obligation to pay the credit card use amount of KRW 3,363,207, and fee of KRW 307,738, and late payment amount of KRW 33,412,09, total of KRW 41,082,954.
B. The real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) originally owned by H was transferred to G on June 20, 2018 by inheritance on October 29, 2018 with respect to the two-thirds of the shares (hereinafter “the shares of this case”) on October 29, 2018 upon the application of the Plaintiff for the above rank by the Plaintiff Company I.
(c)
G entered into a sales contract (hereinafter “the instant sales contract”) with the Defendant on September 10, 2019, and completed the registration of transfer of ownership (hereinafter “registration of transfer of ownership”) with the Daegu District Court No. 33896 on September 16, 2019.
(d)
G was in a state where there was no other property except the instant shares at the time of the instant sales contract.
[Ground for recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1-5, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. According to the above facts, the Plaintiff’s claim for the use of the card against G was already established prior to the conclusion of the instant sales contract, and thus, the obligee is the preserved right.
B. The act of deception and the act of changing the debtor's selling of real estate, which is the only property of the deceased's own, into money which can be consumed, is always an act of deception against the creditor, barring special circumstances. Thus, the debtor's intent of deception is presumed, and the burden of proving that the purchaser did not have bad faith is the beneficiary (see Supreme Court Decision 97Da5420, Apr. 14, 1998). According to the above findings, G is against the plaintiff.