beta
Text
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1...
Reasons
1. The fact-finding and judgment of the first instance court are deemed legitimate even if the evidence submitted to this court by the first instance court citing the evidence duly examined by the court of first instance is neglected.
Therefore, the reasoning of the judgment of this court is as follows, and it is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the following dismissal or addition, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 42
2. Parts in height:
A. The Defendant asserts that C has a claim for a loan of KRW 30 million against M, and that it should be calculated as active property, since C had a claim for a loan of KRW 30 million.
However, in order to be a fraudulent act, the debtor's act of disposing of the debtor's property shall cause a decrease in the debtor's whole property and thus, the debtor's passive property shall be more than active property. In other words, the debtor's positive property should be more than active property, and even if the total amount of the real estate claims exceeds the creditor's claim amount at the time of disposing of the property, the debtor's active property should be excluded from the active property that has no substantial property value and cannot play a role as joint security for the claim, unless there are other special circumstances. If the property is a claim, it shall be reasonably determined whether it is reliable to receive repayment, and shall be included in active property only if it is affirmed.
(See Supreme Court Decision 2001Da32533, Oct. 12, 2001). According to the above legal principle, C is recognized as having remitted KRW 30 million to M on June 16, 2009, according to the records of evidence Nos. 7, but C is recognized as having remitted KRW 30 million to M on June 16, 2009. Meanwhile, in light of the following circumstances, C’s respective statements and arguments No. 5-1, No. 2, and No. 13-1, No. 13-2, and 2, and the purport of the entire arguments, namely, the loan to M on September 2, 2016.