[압류및공매처분무효확인][공1984.9.1.(735),1369]
The legality of the seizure disposition for the real estate for which the ownership transfer registration has been made to the delinquent taxpayer by title trust;
If the property subject to attachment is real estate, it shall be determined by the validity of registration. Even if the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the defaulted taxpayer on the real estate subject to attachment was made through the title trust, the ownership shall be deemed to have been reverted to the defaulted taxpayer externally in accordance with the legal principles of title trust, so long as the defendant (the director of the tax office) attaches the property the ownership of which belongs to the defaulted taxpayer externally, the attachment disposition shall be valid.
Articles 45 and 47 of the National Tax Collection Act
Plaintiff
Daejeon director of the tax office
Seoul High Court Decision 81Gu553 delivered on December 29, 1981
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.
The plaintiff's grounds of appeal are examined.
According to the facts established by the court below, on October 19, 1973, the plaintiff was entrusted to the non-party 1, the above non-party 1, who was the plaintiff's model on March 26, 1974, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on the trust in order with the non-party 2, who was the plaintiff's model on March 26, 1974, but on July 23, 1979, the plaintiff declared that the above non-party 1 would terminate the above title trust with the non-party 2 on the real estate of this case, and on July 31, 1980, the non-party 2 did not execute the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of the cancellation of each above title trust with the non-party 1's name on the non-party 2's name on July 31, 1980, but the defendant seized the real estate of this case on the ground of non-party 2's failure to pay national taxes on February 28, 1979.
Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of the appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.
Justices Kim Young-ju (Presiding Justice)