수익자에 대하여 회생절차가 개시된 경우사해행위취소에 따른 가액배상청구권이공익채권에 해당하는지 여부 - 대법원 2019.4.11. 선고 2018다203715 판결

The Supreme Court's judgment 2018Da203715 pronounced on April 1, 2019 indicatesthat when the rehabiltation procedures for a beneficiary or subsequent purchaser of thefraudulent act commence and then the procedures for monetary compensation asrestiution based on the revoking of fraudulent act folow, the right to claim monetarycompensation is aplicable to a priority claim pursuant to Subparagraph 6 (‘claims thatacrue to the debtor from unlawful gains after the rehabiltation procedures commence’),Paragraph 1, Article 179 of the Debtor Rehabiltation and Bankruptcy Act. In this case,the right to claim monetary compensation is recognized to avoid the exces return whichis caused in the proces of original repayment as a consequence of the cancelation ofthe real estate mortgage right that is the purpose of fraudulent act. In aditon, if thedebtor's creditor claims the return of the property itself, the purpose of fraudulent act,from the rehabiltation debtor along with the revoking of fraudulent act after therehabiltation procedures for a beneficiary or subsequent purchaser of the fraudulent actcommence, this is aplicable to the exercise of the right of reposesion. Therefore, it isdemed necesary to recognize the right to claim monetary compensation as a priority claim, with the status coresponding to the right to claim original repayment, i.e.,comparable to the exercise of the right of reposesion, considering that this suits thepurpose of the creditor revocation system and the notion of fairnes. However, if al orsome of liabilty properties canot be restored through the sale and purchase, securityfurnishing, etc. to the bona fide subsequent purchaser, and the right to claim monetarycompensation is recognized with the inflow of non-specifc money into the beneficiary'sproperty, it is demed dificult to fuly aply the legal principles from the SupremeCourt precedents.