beta
Text
1. The gift contract concluded on June 10, 2013 between the defendant and the non-party C on the real estate stated in the separate sheet between the defendant and the non-party C is 26,250.
Reasons
1. Determination on the cause of the claim
A. 1) The Plaintiff had a claim for KRW 30,00,000 and damages for delay against C with respect to the right to revoke a fraudulent act; and C, as above, is the real estate listed in the separate sheet, which is the only property of the Defendant, the Plaintiff, who is one of his children, while he was liable against the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant real estate”).
(2) As to June 10, 2013, the fact that the registration of ownership transfer was completed on the ground of donation on June 10, 2013 is recognized by either the parties or by the purport of the entire entries and arguments in the evidence Nos. 1 and 2 as well as the whole. (2) The act of donation to the Defendant by C is a fraudulent act detrimental to the Plaintiff, which is the obligee. Since C and the Defendant’s bad faith are presumed, C
(However, the scope of revocation shall be as follows:
According to the principle of restitution of original property and the purport of Gap evidence No. 2 and all pleadings, the right to restitution following the revocation of a fraudulent act by means of restitution, the right to collateral security of KRW 22,750,000 prior to the fraudulent act of this case was established on June 28, 201, and the right to collateral security of KRW 31.20,000 following the fraudulent act of this case was cancelled on June 14, 2013. Thus, the right to collateral security of KRW 31.20,000 following the cancellation of the fraudulent act of this case can be acknowledged that the right to collateral security was established on June 14, 201. Accordingly, the method of restitution following the revocation of the fraudulent act of this case can not be deemed a return of original property, and compensation for value should be granted.
(The plaintiff claims the compensation for value based on the fact that a new collateral security has been established, and such reason is clear, but the cancellation of existing collateral security also requires the compensation for value).As to the scope of the compensation for value, health bond and the compensation for value shall be made at the time of closing of argument.