logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 부천지원 2018.09.19 2018가단604
사해행위취소
Text

1. As to real estate listed in the separate sheet:

A. On April 11, 2017 between Nonparty D and Defendant B, Co., Ltd.

Reasons

The facts that the Plaintiff is the creditor of Nonparty D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”), the real estate listed in the separate sheet, and the non-party Co., Ltd. entered into a pre-sale agreement with Defendant B on April 11, 2017 when the obligation exceeds, and Defendant B entered into a pre-sale agreement with the Daejeon District Court on April 19, 2017, and completed the registration of the right to claim ownership transfer under Article 14787 of the receipt on April 19, 2017. The non-party Co., Ltd entered into a mortgage contract with Defendant C on September 5, 2017. The fact that the establishment registration was completed on September 6, 2017 under the receipt of No. 34697 on September 6, 2017 can be acknowledged by taking into account the overall purport of arguments in the separate sheet No. 1, No. 2-1, 2-2, and 2. Thus, according to the above facts of recognition, the non-party Co., a beneficiary of the Defendants Co.

In regard to this, the defendants defense to the effect that they were unaware of the contract for sale and purchase or the contract for establishing a mortgage was a fraudulent act, but it is not sufficient to acknowledge it only by the evidence of the defendants' submission, and in full view of the overall purport of the pleadings in the testimony of the witness E, the defendant Eul transferred the money that the defendant Eul lent to the non-party company to the non-party company by the representative director E of the non-party company Eul and the defendant Eul transferred to the non-party company F with the auditor of the non-party company. The defendant Eul can recognize the fact that the non-party company was a person who was in charge of the non-party company's business (in particular, from November 15, 2012 to November 15, 2016 when the witness E was detained, it seems that the defendants exclusively dealt with the business). According to the above facts of recognition.

arrow