logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2020.12.10 2020가단518843
사해행위취소
Text

The plaintiff's primary and conjunctive claims are all dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Reasons

1. The Defendant, on July 9, 1992, married with Nonparty C, but divorced on February 19, 2014 by the final decision of recommending divorce.

C On March 27, 2001, after completing the registration of ownership transfer with respect to apartment E units located in Yeongdeungpo-gu, Suwon-si (hereinafter “instant real estate”), C donated the said real estate to the Defendant on July 9, 2013.

The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit with Seoul Northern District Court No. 2016Gaso49193 to seek the payment of the takeover amount to C, and on April 26, 2017, the judgment of the court below that “C shall pay to the Plaintiff 6,791,743 won and 2,886,72 won among them at the rate of 39% per annum from December 21, 2016 to the date of full payment,” which became final and conclusive around that time.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. The primary claim C was a title trust with the Defendant for the purpose of evading compulsory execution. Even if a title trust between husband and wife was null and void, C has a claim for return of unjust enrichment equivalent to the sales fund of the instant real estate against the Defendant.

On the other hand, the Plaintiff, as of April 1, 2020, has a claim against C with a judgment amounting to KRW 8,155,992 as of April 1, 202 and the amount equivalent to delay damages therefor, and thus, it shall be deemed as a preserved claim and shall exercise in subrogation C’s right to return unjust enrichment to

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff KRW 8,155,92 and damages for delay from July 9, 2013.

B. Preliminary Claim C donated the instant real estate to the Defendant for the purpose of evading compulsory execution, and the Defendant actively participated therein, which constitutes a tort.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the above 8,155,92 won and damages for delay from the day following the delivery date of a copy of the complaint of this case.

3. Determination

(a)with respect to the primary claim;

arrow