Open Decision Ledger · Rehabilitation & bankruptcy
Whether the right of avoidance and the effects of its exercise are extinguished upon termination of the corporate reorganization procedure
Translated from the Korean original. Read the Korean
Supreme Court, Oct. 12, 2006, 2006Da32507 (judgment)
No holding summary · checked against points at issue. The official text publishes no summary of the holding for this decision. The quotation and factors in this record are copied verbatim from the points at issue; the evidence for each axis is taken from the points at issue, the order and the reasons.
Case name: 정리채권확정
Official text on the National Law Information Center
Question
Under the former Corporate Reorganization Act, is the right of avoidance extinguished when the corporate reorganization procedure terminates, and where the right of avoidance was exercised while the procedure was pending but the procedure terminated before the property was recovered, are the effects of that exercise, such as the claim for return of the property, also extinguished?
Holding
Because the right of avoidance is a right that may be exercised only by the custodian on the premise that the reorganization procedure is pending, it is extinguished upon termination of the reorganization procedure. The Supreme Court held that, even where the right had been exercised while the procedure was pending, if the procedure terminated before the property was recovered by the company, the rights seeking return of the property or repayment of its value are likewise extinguished, so the defendant may no longer assert the effects of the exercise of the right of avoidance.
Points at issue, verbatim
구 회사정리법 제78조의 부인권이 회사정리절차의 종결로 소멸하는지 여부(적극)
Unofficial English translation
Whether the right of avoidance under Article 78 of the former Corporate Reorganization Act is extinguished by the conclusion of the corporate reorganization proceedings (affirmative)
Disposition
Dismissed Stated in the decision
상고를 기각한다.
Unofficial English translation
The appeal is dismissed.
Form of the test
Existing test applied Read from the decision
그렇다면 위 법리에 따라 피고로서는 더 이상 부인권 행사의 효과를 주장할 수 없다.
Unofficial English translation
If so, under the foregoing legal principle, the defendant can no longer assert the effect of the exercise of the right of avoidance.
Factors
- 구 회사정리법 제78조의 부인권
- 회사정리절차의 종결로 소멸하는지 여부(적극)
- 정리절차의 진행 중에 행사된 부인권
- 회사에게로 재산이 회복되기 전에 회사정리절차가 종결한 경우
- 그 부인권 행사의 효과인 회사 재산 반환청구권 등의 소멸 여부(적극)
Unofficial English translation
• The right of avoidance under Article 78 of the former Corporate Reorganization Act
• Whether it is extinguished by the conclusion of the corporate reorganization proceedings (affirmative)
• The right of avoidance exercised during the course of the reorganization proceedings
• Where the corporate reorganization proceedings were concluded before the property was restored to the company
• Whether the claim for return of the company's property, etc., which is the effect of the exercise of that right of avoidance, is extinguished (affirmative)
Relation to precedent
Follows earlier decisions Stated in the decision
대법원 1995. 10. 13. 선고 95다30253 판결, 2004. 7. 22. 선고 2002다46058 판결 등 참조
Unofficial English translation
See, inter alia, Supreme Court Decision 95Da30253 decided October 13, 1995; Supreme Court Decision 2002Da46058 decided July 22, 2004.
Decisions referred to
대법원 1995. 10. 13. 선고 95다30253 판결(공1995하, 3775), 대법원 2004. 7. 22. 선고 2002다46058 판결, 대법원 2006. 10. 12. 선고 2005다59307 판결(공2006하, 1884)
Burden of proof
Not addressed Not in the decision
Open question and revisit condition
Where the procedure terminated after property had already been recovered by the company as a result of the exercise of the right of avoidance during the reorganization procedure, is the effect of that recovery maintained even after the termination?
As for the current provisions on the right of avoidance, including Article 100 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act, if a judgment adopts a different view on the survival of the effects of the right of avoidance after termination, this reading will be re-examined.
Cross-family AI independent reading & axis check
7 of 8 axes matched GPT-6 Astra (OpenAI, codex CLI) · 2026-10-16
In a comparison with an independent reading by another line of AI (GPT-6 Astra), which read only the original text without seeing the first reading, 7 of the 8 axes agreed, and the readings diverged on the fourth axis (Form of the test).
Axis 4 (Form of the test): Primary “Application to the facts” vs Independent “Elements stated”
Because the original text states termination of the procedure and non-recovery of the property as the conditions for extinction and dismisses the final appeal, the first reading may focus on the application to the case, while the independent reading may focus on the requirements for extinction.
정리절차의 진행 중에 행사된 부인권에 기하여 회사에게로 재산이 회복되기 전에 회사정리절차가 종결한 경우, 그 부인권 행사의 효과인 회사 재산 반환청구권 등의 소멸 여부(적극)Raw responses and comparison record: Protocol · Blind readings (JSONL) · Axis comparison (JSONL) · SHA-256 (JSON)
Lower-court contrast & scope of application
Lower-court reading vs. Supreme Court holding
Lower-court context: The court below (the Seoul High Court, judgment pronounced May 3, 2006, Case No. 2005Na88338) went on to determine whether the defense of avoidance raised by the custodian in an action for confirmation of reorganization claims was well founded, and then confirmed that the plaintiffs held the reorganization claims as stated in its holding. With respect to the defendant, the corporate reorganization procedure was terminated by a ruling issued on September 27, 2005, after the judgment of the first instance was pronounced and before the judgment of the court below was pronounced.
Supreme Court standard: The Supreme Court examined the matter ex officio (by the court's own authority) and found that, because the right of avoidance and the effects of its exercise had been extinguished upon termination of the reorganization procedure, the reasoning of the court below, which had determined whether the defense of avoidance was well founded, was not appropriate. However, holding that the conclusion confirming the reorganization claims was proper, the Supreme Court dismissed the final appeal.
Distinguishing conditions
- A case where the procedure terminated after the property had already been recovered by the company on the basis of the exercise of the right of avoidance during the reorganization procedure
- A case where the reorganization procedure is not terminated but is still pending, so that the custodian may exercise the right of avoidance
- A case where the issue is a claim based not on the right of avoidance but on general private-law rights such as the creditor's right of revocation under the Civil Act
Record verification notes
Before asserting the same conclusion, it is necessary to check first from the Records whether the ruling terminating the reorganization procedure has actually become final and conclusive, and whether that point in time preceded or followed the recovery of the property.
From the official text
Points at issue
구 회사정리법 제78조의 부인권이 회사정리절차의 종결로 소멸하는지 여부(적극) 및 정리절차의 진행 중에 행사된 부인권에 기하여 회사에게로 재산이 회복되기 전에 회사정리절차가 종결한 경우, 그 부인권 행사의 효과인 회사 재산 반환청구권 등의 소멸 여부(적극)
Unofficial English translation
Whether the right of avoidance under Article 78 of the former Corporate Reorganization Act is extinguished by the conclusion of the corporate reorganization proceedings (affirmative), and whether, where the corporate reorganization proceedings were concluded before the property was restored to the company by virtue of the right of avoidance exercised during the course of the reorganization proceedings, the claim for return of the company's property, etc., which is the effect of the exercise of that right of avoidance, is extinguished (affirmative)
Summary of the holding
The official text publishes no summary of the holding for this decision. The quotation and factors in this record are copied verbatim from the points at issue; the evidence for each axis is taken from the points at issue, the order and the reasons.
Order
상고를 기각한다. 상고비용은 피고가 부담한다.
Unofficial English translation
The appeal is dismissed. The costs of the final appeal shall be borne by the defendant.
Provisions referred to
구 회사정리법(2005. 3. 31. 법률 제7428호 채무자 회생 및 파산에 관한 법률 부칙 제2조로 폐지) 제78조(현행 채무자 회생 및 파산에 관한 법률 제100조 참조), 제82조(현행 채무자 회생 및 파산에 관한 법률 제105조 참조), 제271조(현행 채무자 회생 및 파산에 관한 법률 제283조 참조)
Read 2026-10-16 · Cross-read 2026-10-16. All quotes matched against the official text. The Chinese-character placeholders the court used for anonymised parties are given in their Korean readings, and parenthetical Chinese-character glosses are omitted.
Every entry is published only after all quotes have been matched character by character against the official text, and audited by an independent second reading from a different model family across all eight axes. Both agreed axes and text-grounded interpretive divergences are recorded openly. The ledger is a research record, not an assessment of the court or advice on any matter.
Back to the ledger