{"title":"债权转让中欺诈的判断标准","authors":"Dawoon Jung","doi":"10.38133/cnulawreview.2022.42.4.329","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"If the debtor who is in excess of debt transfers the debt to a specific creditor, the act of assigning the debt may be a fraudulent act against other general creditors. A clear criterion is needed to determine whether a fraudulent act has been established. First, the primary criterion for judging of fraudulent is whether or not a lack of common collateral, an objective requirement, has been induced or deepened. Since this may be determined differently depending on the type of action, it is necessary to determine for each action type. Even if the lack of common collateral has been objectively aggravated by the assignment of claims, it may be reasonable to deny the fraudulent by taking into account the various circumstances of the debtor. Therefore, it is necessary to secondarily consider the comprehensive factors to determine whether fraudulent acts are established. In particular, in the case of preferential transfer such as the assignment of claims to specific creditors, the degree of fraud according to objective factors cannot be said to be high. Therefore, it is necessary to strictly apply other comprehensive considerations. One of these factors to consider is the recently revised Japanese civil law regulations.","PeriodicalId":288398,"journal":{"name":"Institute for Legal Studies Chonnam National University","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Criteria for Judgment of Fraud in a assignment of Claims\",\"authors\":\"Dawoon Jung\",\"doi\":\"10.38133/cnulawreview.2022.42.4.329\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"If the debtor who is in excess of debt transfers the debt to a specific creditor, the act of assigning the debt may be a fraudulent act against other general creditors. A clear criterion is needed to determine whether a fraudulent act has been established. First, the primary criterion for judging of fraudulent is whether or not a lack of common collateral, an objective requirement, has been induced or deepened. Since this may be determined differently depending on the type of action, it is necessary to determine for each action type. Even if the lack of common collateral has been objectively aggravated by the assignment of claims, it may be reasonable to deny the fraudulent by taking into account the various circumstances of the debtor. Therefore, it is necessary to secondarily consider the comprehensive factors to determine whether fraudulent acts are established. In particular, in the case of preferential transfer such as the assignment of claims to specific creditors, the degree of fraud according to objective factors cannot be said to be high. Therefore, it is necessary to strictly apply other comprehensive considerations. One of these factors to consider is the recently revised Japanese civil law regulations.\",\"PeriodicalId\":288398,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Institute for Legal Studies Chonnam National University\",\"volume\":\"29 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Institute for Legal Studies Chonnam National University\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.38133/cnulawreview.2022.42.4.329\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Institute for Legal Studies Chonnam National University","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.38133/cnulawreview.2022.42.4.329","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Criteria for Judgment of Fraud in a assignment of Claims
If the debtor who is in excess of debt transfers the debt to a specific creditor, the act of assigning the debt may be a fraudulent act against other general creditors. A clear criterion is needed to determine whether a fraudulent act has been established. First, the primary criterion for judging of fraudulent is whether or not a lack of common collateral, an objective requirement, has been induced or deepened. Since this may be determined differently depending on the type of action, it is necessary to determine for each action type. Even if the lack of common collateral has been objectively aggravated by the assignment of claims, it may be reasonable to deny the fraudulent by taking into account the various circumstances of the debtor. Therefore, it is necessary to secondarily consider the comprehensive factors to determine whether fraudulent acts are established. In particular, in the case of preferential transfer such as the assignment of claims to specific creditors, the degree of fraud according to objective factors cannot be said to be high. Therefore, it is necessary to strictly apply other comprehensive considerations. One of these factors to consider is the recently revised Japanese civil law regulations.