The case holding that the transfer of claims between husband and wife falls under a litigation trust and thus null and void.

The case holding that the assignment of claims between husband and wife is null and void because it falls under a trust with the main purpose of enabling litigation.

Article 7 of the Trust Act, Article 449 of the Civil Act

Supreme Court Decision 82Meu1919 (Gong1983, 1010) Decided February 14, 1984 (Gong1984, 508), Supreme Court Decision 91Da26522 Decided November 12, 1991 (Gong1993, 1459)

Plaintiff (Attorney Yang Young-young, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Defendant (Attorney Ha-soo, Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

Gwangju High Court Decision 94Na4287 delivered on March 31, 1995

The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Gwangju High Court.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

As to the fifth ground for appeal

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below rejected the above assertion on the ground that the plaintiff's husband lending KRW 70 million to the non-party 2 and that the defendant assumed the above debt against the non-party 1, as stated in its reasoning, and that the non-party 1 transferred the above claim to the defendant and notified the defendant thereof, and that the above assignment of the claim is null and void because it mainly focuses on allowing the plaintiff to conduct litigation, i.e., the above assignment of claim is in violation of the provisions of Article 7 of the Trust Act, and it cannot be concluded that the husband transferred the claim to the wife and it cannot be concluded as a trust transfer mainly for litigation, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

However, according to the records, the above non-party 1 appeared as a witness of the plaintiff in the court of first instance, and stated that the plaintiff, the wife, had the plaintiff conduct the transfer of the claim of this case, because he did not have any time of business, and there is no evidence to deem that the plaintiff acquired the claim of this case in accordance with the reason or purpose different from the testimony of the above non-party 1. In addition, although the defendant asserted the above trust from the court of first instance through the above court of first instance, he did not respond differently to the causes of the transfer of the claim of this case until the court of first instance.

In the same way, although the assignment of claims in this case must be deemed to have been primarily aimed at enabling litigation, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on trust aimed at a lawsuit and by misunderstanding facts in violation of the rules of evidence, which affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the facts against the rules of evidence, although the assignment of claims in this case has no choice but to be deemed to have been made for the reason that there is no evidence

Therefore, without further proceeding to decide on the remaining grounds of appeal, the lower judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the lower court for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Lee Jae-soo (Presiding Justice)