logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
arrow
서울동부지방법원 2015.03.03 2012가단41817
사해행위취소 등
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On February 14, 2006, the Plaintiff: (a) purchased approximately KRW 140,00 square meters (451,146 square meters) from D in Jeju-si; (b) borrowed KRW 20 billion at a rate of 10% per annum; and (c) the overdue interest rate of KRW 19% per annum; and (d) the representative director B at the time of the establishment of E, F, G, H, and C as joint and several liability for the above loans.

B. The Plaintiff received reimbursement of KRW 10 billion from C on September 3, 2007, and disposed of a security on March 30, 2012, and appropriated KRW 7.6 billion for repayment.

C. On July 1, 2011, B filed a provisional registration with the Defendant on July 1, 201, to preserve the right to claim transfer of ownership based on the trade reservation (hereinafter “instant trade reservation”) on the same day with respect to the real estate stated in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

[Grounds for Recognition: Evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Evidence No. 5-1 through 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff asserted that around the date of the instant purchase and sale reservation, the Plaintiff had a total of KRW 16,673,150,685 claims against C and B, a principal debtor, and joint and several sureties. However, on July 1, 2011, B concluded a pre-sale agreement with the Defendant on the instant real estate, which is the sole active property between the Defendant, and completed a provisional registration for preserving the right to claim ownership transfer in the future of the Defendant, as stated in the purport of the claim. As such, the instant pre-sale agreement constitutes a fraudulent act detrimental to the Plaintiff, a general creditor, by disposing of the sole property, and thus, the instant pre-sale agreement is revoked, and the Defendant is obligated to implement the provisional registration cancellation registration procedure under the name of the Defendant with respect to the instant real estate.

B. The Defendant’s assertion B terminated the instant joint and several sureties agreement on August 25, 2006 on the grounds of change of circumstances, and even if not, the Plaintiff did not do so.

arrow