logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원순천지원 2016.12.22 2016가단75118
사해행위취소
Text

1. As to each real estate listed in the separate sheet:

A. A gift contract concluded on February 25, 2014 between the Defendant and B shall be deemed to have been concluded.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. As of February 25, 2014, Jeju Bank had a claim of KRW 50 million for the principal and interest of loans to debtors C as of February 25, 2014, and B guaranteed the above principal and interest of loans.

B. B, on March 17, 2014, completed the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of donation on February 25, 2014, for each real estate listed in the separate sheet owned by B (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

C. After the Plaintiff received a total amount of the principal and interest claim against the obligor C and the joint guarantor B from the Jeju Bank, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Gwangju District Court 2015 Ghana 505020, and filed a lawsuit for claiming the payment of the transfer amount and rendered a judgment on June 12, 2015, “the Defendant shall pay the Plaintiff 59,359,89 won and the amount calculated by the rate of 19% per annum from January 22, 2015 to the date of full payment” and the said judgment became final and conclusive on July 1, 2015.

At the time of March 17, 2014, as active property B as of March 17, 2014, not only the instant real estate (or equivalent to KRW 3.7 million at the market price) but also the low-speed passenger car (or equivalent to KRW 2.6 million at the market price) in 2001, and the cargo package II in 2014 (or equivalent to KRW 10.7 million at the market price), and there was a liability for the principal and interest of KRW 50 million against Jeju Bank.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 through 6 evidence (including number number), each fact inquiry result, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the above facts, B completed the registration of transfer of ownership on the ground of donation to the Defendant in excess of its obligation, and thus, the above contract constitutes a fraudulent act unless there are special circumstances as an act causing the shortage of common creditors’ joint security.

Therefore, the contract of gift between the defendant and B regarding the instant real estate shall be revoked as a fraudulent act, and the defendant shall be revoked as a fraudulent act.

arrow