{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"Atlas Legal Blog","provider_url":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog","author_name":"\ubc95\ubb34\ubc95\uc778 \uc544\ud2c0\ub77c\uc2a4","author_url":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/author\/prinz001\/","title":"Fraudulent Conveyance Avoidance and Bankruptcy Priority in South Korea: Supreme Court Decision 2025Da210073 - Atlas Legal Blog","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"R8IzWtJzxW\"><a href=\"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/fraudulent-conveyance-avoidance-bankruptcy-priority-south-korea\/\">Fraudulent Conveyance Avoidance and Bankruptcy Priority in South Korea: Supreme Court Decision 2025Da210073<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/fraudulent-conveyance-avoidance-bankruptcy-priority-south-korea\/embed\/#?secret=R8IzWtJzxW\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"&#8220;Fraudulent Conveyance Avoidance and Bankruptcy Priority in South Korea: Supreme Court Decision 2025Da210073&#8221; &#8212; Atlas Legal Blog\" data-secret=\"R8IzWtJzxW\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n\/\/# sourceURL=https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/wp-includes\/js\/wp-embed.min.js\n<\/script>\n","description":"Corporate Disputes \u00b7 Insolvency Law \u00b7 South Korea Fraudulent Conveyance Avoidance and Bankruptcy in South Korea:What Happens to the Claimant&#8217;s Priority? Soyoung Park \u00b7 Representative Attorney, Atlas Legal Analysis of Korea Supreme Court Decision 2025Da210073 (May 20, 2026) Table of Contents 1. What Happened in This Case? 2. Why Was the Challenge to the Capital..."}