logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2019.05.31 2018나76651
사해행위취소
Text

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. All of the plaintiffs' lawsuits of this case are dismissed.

3. The plaintiffs' total costs of litigation.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On June 1, 2012, the Plaintiffs: (a) leased KRW 260 million to E with interest rate of KRW 200 million on February 5, 201; and (b) on September 1, 2012 (a) entered the obligee into G as the husband of the Plaintiff C in the loan certificate (Evidence A No. 1) drafted at the time) and completed the registration of creation of a neighboring mortgage with respect to the forest land of three parcels, other than the CF of Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, with the mortgagee G and the maximum debt amount of KRW 390,00,000.

B. On the other hand, as between March 3, 201, E entered into a lease agreement with I to settle the price of the extension of the third floor of the commercial building located outside J and two lots of land (hereinafter “I-owned commercial building”) owned by E (hereinafter “I-owned commercial building”). On the same day, E entered into a lease agreement with I to set the above third floor K K of the commercial building as KRW 31.8 million, monthly rent of KRW 1.6 million, and the lease period from May 10, 201 to May 9, 2017.

However, the above lease deposit and monthly rent agreed to offset the above construction cost by KRW 147 million.0 million.

E also entered into a lease agreement with I on the first floor (on the first floor) owned by I in 201 with regard to lease deposit amounting to KRW 30 million, monthly rent of KRW 1.3 million, and the second floor of the same commercial building (hereinafter referred to as “each commercial building of this case”), including the second floor leased by E, with regard to lease deposit amounting to KRW 15 million, and monthly rent of KRW 1.6 million.

C. On December 30, 2012, the Defendant, a private village of E, shall be the lessee with respect to each of the instant commercial buildings between I and I, and the lessee shall be the Defendant.

The lease contract was entered into with the same contents as each of the lease agreements described in the paragraph.

On the other hand, the provisional registration of the right to claim the transfer of ownership in the name of the defendant was completed on October 16, 2013 with respect to the area of 812 square meters in the wife population M, N206 square meters, and O 732 square meters (hereinafter “each of the instant lands”), which was owned by E, around October 16, 2013. G is due to the revocation of the fraudulent act around October 2013.

arrow