채권양도와 사해행위가 문제되는 주요 쟁점에 대한 고찰- 판례를 중심으로 -

A claim may be assigned(Article 449, Paragraph 1 of the Civil Act). However, if the obligor assigns the claim with the knowledge that it would prejudice the obligee, the obligee may apply to the court for its revocation and restitution of its original status (Article 406 of the Civil Act). Here, restitution of the original status in the clause means restitution of the original property in principle; however, monetary compensation may be admissible in case the original cannot be restored. There are only two articles of the Civil Code concerning the actio pauliana, but the case is very much in practice. Most case resolution takes place on the basis of the existing case law. In this regard, I think that analyzing and summarizing the precedents of revocation of the acts related to the specific issues are very important for resolving similar cases in the future. Recently, the Supreme Court ruled that a revocation obligee would not be able to claim a third obligor if the assignment of claim was canceled by an act of destruction. This paper examines the major issues concerning the assignment of claim and fraudulent act on the basis of the above judgment. First, we examine the cases in which the assignment of claim is a fraudulent act, and then examine the existing academic disputes and the right and wrong of the ruling. When the assignment of claim is canceled, the details of the recovery method will be examined in detail.