(영문) 수원지방법원 2019.05.07 2018가단540076

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 수원지방법원 2019.05.07 2018가단540076

사해행위취소

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence evidence and the purport of the entire pleadings as follows: (a) the Plaintiff supplied goods equivalent to KRW 10,704,043 to July 16, 2016, and November 7, 2016, paid KRW 4,993,510 to the non-party company as the price for the supply of goods (i.e., KRW 10,704,043 - KRW 4,93,510) and damages for delay at the rate of KRW 15% per annum from July 20, 2016 to November 7, 2016 operated by the non-party company.

2. Determination

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion on the cause of the Plaintiff’s claim asserts that, on April 27, 2017, the Nonparty Company concluded a claim transfer and takeover contract with the Defendant, which should be revoked as a fraudulent act detrimental to the Plaintiff, the obligee, and that accordingly, the Defendant is obliged to notify the Nonparty Company that the said claim transfer and takeover contract was revoked.

B. We cannot accept the Plaintiff’s assertion on the ground of claim without examining other points for the following reasons.

1) The Plaintiff specified the fraudulent act subject to revocation as the bonds transfer and takeover contract concluded on April 27, 2017 between the non-party company and the Defendant. In full view of the evidence evidence Nos. 3, 1 through 3, and the purport of the entire pleadings, it is acknowledged that the Defendant entered into a business transfer and takeover contract with the non-party company on April 27, 2017, but it is insufficient to acknowledge the fact that the Defendant entered into the bonds transfer and takeover contract with the non-party company on April 27, 2017, only with the evidence Nos. 1 through 6 and each fact-finding reply with the head of the Sin-si-si-si Office of this Court and the head of Sin-si-si-si Office, and there is no other evidence to

2) Furthermore, in order to accept a claim for revocation of a fraudulent act, the debtor is insolvent at the time of the fraudulent act.

유사 판례

-부산지방법원 2008. 12. 24. 선고 2008가합1562 판결

-인천지방법원부천지원 2016.03.22 2015가단16943

-인천지방법원 2019.04.09 2017나12684

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.11.12 2015가단97290

-광주지방법원순천지원 2020.01.30 2019가단1873