A. 1) The director of the tax office of the Ulsan District Tax Office, under the Plaintiff’s control, disposes of the bonus that reverts to B on June 30, 2014 (hereinafter in this case’s income disposition) from the bonus that reverts to B in 2011.

2) On June 24, 2014, B entered into a gift agreement with the Defendant, the wife, and the Defendant, on the same day, completed the registration of ownership transfer for the instant real estate on the same day.

On the same day, the defendant completed the registration of the establishment of a neighboring community credit cooperative with the maximum debt amount of 7,200,000 won, the debtor, the debtor, the mortgagee, and the mortgagee of the right to collateral security.

3) B was in excess of obligations at the time of the instant gift agreement. [The fact that there is no dispute over grounds for recognition, Gap 1-6 evidence, and the purport of the entire pleadings.]

B. 1) Determination 1) The instant donation contract constitutes a fraudulent act, and B may be deemed to have been aware of it. 2) The instant donation contract should be revoked, and the Defendant is obligated to implement the procedure for ownership transfer registration for the instant real estate to restore the real name to its original state.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The Defendant’s assertion 1) B is only the representative director in the form of C, and in light of the fact that the instant disposition of income is unlawful, and there is no obligation to pay global income tax accordingly (i.e., the principal place) the Defendant did not know that the instant gift contract would prejudice the obligee.

(B)(b).

Judgment

11. As long as the taxation disposition with respect to a claim is not considered to be null and void as a matter of course, there is a reason to revoke the taxation disposition.

The taxation disposition is valid until it is legally revoked by the fairness or executory power of the administrative act.

As such, in the civil procedure, it can be said.