(영문) 창원지방법원 2017.07.20 2017가단103187

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 창원지방법원 2017.07.20 2017가단103187

사해행위취소

Text

1. As to motor vehicles listed in the separate sheet:

A. It was concluded on February 13, 2017 between the Defendant and C.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On October 14, 2013, the Plaintiff drafted a promissory note No. 4777, No. 2013 (hereinafter “notarial deed of this case”) with a face value of KRW 100,00,000, the date of issuance October 14, 2013, and the date of payment as of December 30, 2013.

B. On February 13, 2017, C entered into a title transfer transaction contract with the Defendant (hereinafter “instant contract”) with respect to a motor vehicle listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant motor vehicle”) owned by it, and on the same day, C entered into a title transfer registration procedure with respect to the said motor vehicle.

C. C was in excess of the obligation as of the time of the registration of transfer of ownership of the instant vehicle and the closing date of pleadings.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, fact inquiry results of this court's Kim Sea, purport of whole pleadings

2. Whether the fraudulent act has been established and the method of reinstatement;

A. The Plaintiff’s claim of KRW 100,000,000 against C based on the notarial deed of this case constitutes the preserved claim of revocation of the fraudulent act.

B. The plaintiff C had transferred the instant motor vehicle to the defendant in excess of his/her obligation. This constitutes a fraudulent act and thus should be revoked. The defendant asserts that C should implement the procedure for cancellation of the registration of transfer of ownership of the instant motor vehicle due to restitution to the original state.

B) The Defendant’s instant motor vehicle is the Defendant’s property purchased by the Defendant, but is placed in trust under the name of C. As such, the instant motor vehicle asserts that it cannot respond to the Plaintiff’s claim for revocation of fraudulent act premised on the premise that it constitutes the Defendant’s responsible property. (A) Determination as to whether it constitutes the Defendant’s responsible property or heavy machinery (or acquisition, loss, and transfer of ownership of construction machinery) becomes effective by registering its acquisition, loss, and transfer of

유사 판례

-의정부지방법원 2018.12.12 2017가단133093

-창원지방법원통영지원 2017.11.17 2017가단24006

-창원지방법원 2016.10.28 2013가단30649

-수원지방법원 2017.08.31 2017나54821

-수원지방법원 2020.05.27 2019가단29330