beta
Text
1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiffs are F and G’s children, and E are the same children of G.
B. From March 12, 2002 to February 8, 2007, E received a total of KRW 391,700,000 from Plaintiff or F under the pretext of real estate investment. From April 20, 2002 to February 26, 2004, E wired F with total of KRW 115,70,000 as real estate investment income.
And the F loaned a total of KRW 30 million to E from February 5, 2007 to August of the same month.
C. On May 22, 2013, E sold real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant land”) to the Defendant (hereinafter “instant sales contract”), and on June 20, 2013, the Defendant’s District Court Seocheon District Court’s receipt No. 23315, Jun. 20, 2013.
At the time of May 22, 2013, the date of the instant sales contract, the value of the instant land was KRW 984,403,00. At that time, the instant land was set up a collateral security (hereinafter “each of the instant collateral security”).
Serial Registration No. 1054, Dec. 7, 2004, the maximum debt amount of which was KRW 61054,610,000,000,000,000 for agricultural cooperatives, the additional agricultural cooperatives, which received No. 44788,50,000,000 won No. 10628,13,000,000 won received on Mar. 19, 2012, I (I4), of KRW 14913,130,000,000,000 as of April 24, 2013
E. On August 22, 2013, the Plaintiffs drafted a notarial deed with the content that the notary public lent KRW 600 million to E by the Plaintiffs under No. 379 of the No. 2013 No. 2013.
(hereinafter referred to as the “notarial deed of this case”). [The grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 4, 5-19, witness E’s testimony, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. Although the existence of the preserved right and the claim protected by the obligee’s right of revocation are, in principle, arising prior to the commission of an act that can be viewed as a fraudulent act, there is a legal relationship that has already been based on the establishment of the claim at the time of such fraudulent act.