logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2020.04.23 2019가단535972
사해행위취소
Text

1. It was concluded on April 11, 2018 with respect to one-half shares of the real estate listed in the separate sheet between the Defendant and B.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. A. The Plaintiff entered into a credit guarantee agreement with C on November 25, 2015, with respect to the credit guarantee request for a loan granted by D Bank (hereinafter “C”) by the Plaintiff on a credit guarantee agreement between C and C on November 25, 2015 (the final change on November 23, 2018) with the credit guarantee principal amounting to KRW 475,00,000,000, and the credit guarantee term (the final change on November 25, 2016). B as of the same day, the Plaintiff jointly and severally guaranteed the liability for indemnity under the said credit guarantee agreement. (2) On August 31, 2018, the Plaintiff was notified by D Bank that C had a long-term natural environment occurred.

3) On December 10, 2018, the Plaintiff paid KRW 483,204,095 to D Bank on behalf of C on December 10, 2018. (b) B entering into a mortgage agreement between B and the Defendant on April 11, 2018, as to one-half portion of the real estate listed in the separate sheet with the Defendant (hereinafter “instant mortgage agreement”).

(B) On April 11, 2018, the Suwon District Court concluded the registration of creation of a mortgage of KRW 150,000,000 (the maximum debt amount) as of April 11, 2018, and completed the registration of creation of a mortgage of KRW 150,000 (the maximum debt amount).

2. Determination

A. In light of the facts of recognition of preserved rights and fraudulent act as well as the time and circumstances leading up to the establishment registration of a neighboring mortgage against the defendant as shown in B, the act of entering into the instant mortgage contract with the defendant in excess of the debt constitutes a fraudulent act as an act of deepening the shortage of joint security against the general creditors including the plaintiff, and the defendant's bad faith is presumed to be the beneficiary.

B. Whether the Defendant acted in good faith, the Defendant loaned KRW 600 million to B for acquisition on September 2015, but the repayment of KRW 400 million was delayed, thereby securing the foregoing loan claims, which was completed on April 11, 2018.

at the time;

arrow