beta
Text
1. On May 24, 2017 between D and E, and the Defendants, each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet among the agreements on division of their inherited property.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On December 9, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a claim for reimbursement against D with the Seoul Central District Court Decision 2015 Ghana52405, and rendered a decision of performance recommendation that “D shall pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 16,816,00 and the amount calculated by the rate of 5% per annum from February 17, 2006 to May 15, 2006, and 20% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment.” The said decision of performance recommendation became final and conclusive.
B. On December 18, 2016, the network F, as referred to in D, owned each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) and died.
The heir, who is the spouse, was Defendant B, D, E, and Defendant C. However, on May 24, 2017, they agreed on the division of inherited property to share the shares of Defendant B 2/3 and the shares of Defendant C1/3, and completed the registration of ownership transfer for the instant real property on May 25, 2016.
At the time, D was in excess of debt, and the inheritance share of this case was the only real estate of D.
C. The instant real estate was established with the establishment of the right to collateral security (i.e., the maximum debt amount of May 30, 200, ② the maximum debt amount of June 12, 2001, ② the maximum debt amount of June 12, 2001, KRW 13,000,000), and the Defendants’ ownership transfer registration was completed in full amount of KRW 30,638,343 of the respective secured debt amount of the G Federation’s respective secured debt amount of the said right on June 23, 2017.
As of April 4, 2018, the current market price of the instant real estate is KRW 186,00,000, and as of June 4, 2018, the principal and interest of the Plaintiff’s credit against D is KRW 28,083,098.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 3-1, 2, Gap evidence 4-1 to 9, Gap evidence 5, Gap evidence 6, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination as to the cause of action
A. According to the facts of the recognition of the fraudulent act, D is the only one under the status of excess of its obligation.