미국 통일 사해 양도법(UFTA) 에 관한 연구

This study examines the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act(hereafter “UFTA”) in U.S. and also its historic and various precedents effect on its revision. The UFTA's model is the Statue of Elizabeth in 1570 that was enacted in order to address this basic form of creditor evasion. The statute declared void any transfer by a debtor made with the actual intent to hinder, delay or defraud the debtor’s creditors. The statute focused on actual intent. So Courts began to look for “badges of fraud” that indicated an illegal transfer. The badges of fraud are circumstantial evidence that can support a finding of actual intent to defraud. Since the intent to hinder, delay, or defraud creditors is seldom susceptible of direct proof, courts have relied on badges of fraud. So The Uniform Act was a codification of the “better” decisions applying the Statute of 13 Elizabeth. Because the weight given these badges varied greatly from jurisdiction, U.S. Uniform Conference sought to minimize or eliminate the diversity by providing that proof of certain fact combinations would conclusively establish fraud. That consequence is that established new section ‘constructive fraud’. This UFTA include other ennumerable sections. That means the law provides indication of how Jurist should interpret and of creditor and debtor for how do they act. This is the only valuable things of Statute. Now Ministry of Justice of Korea was carrying out an legal Project of amending the Korean Civil Code. The goal of the Project reflects legal doctrine about fraudulent Transfer developed by courts and the legal academia, and attempts to minimize legal uncertainty. I hope this study addressed issues in the UFTA has positive effects on KCC amending project.