Earticle

초록

영어

According to Article 407 of Current Civil Act, the revocation of fraudulent act and restitution of its original status takes effect for the benefit of all creditors. The majority of academic world and the Supreme Court including this judgement, as repeatedly alleged in previous cases, admits equivalent value compensation of returning money by the revocation decision, as one method of restitution. But decision ordering compensation to equivalent value leads the creditor who issue the suit for the right of revocation to be exclusively paid preferred to others creditors, and the creditors except plaintiff are prejudiced by that decision. According to this result, the other creditors can't share the benefit of the revocation of fraudulent act and restitution of its original status. This problems is inconsistent with its original intent and purpose. So I suggest that, in case of returning the money by the revocation decision, the money should be deposited in a court, and the money should be shared by all creditors in portion of amount real claim to the debtor.

목차

I. 대상판결의 개요
 II. 평석
 III. 결어
 참고문헌
 국문요약
 

키워드

저자

• 태기정 [ Tae, Ki-Jung | 전북대학교 법학전문대학원 부교수, 변호사 ]

참고문헌

발행기관

간행물

표지보기 관심저널 등록

• 간행물명

  원광법학 [Journal of Law research]

• 간기

  계간

• pISSN

  1598-429X

• eISSN

  2508-4526

• 수록기간

  1962~2026

• 등재여부

  KCI 등재

• 십진분류

  KDC 360 DDC 340