사해행위취소
1. The decision subject to review shall be revoked.
2. Revocation of the judgment of the court of first instance, and the plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
3...
1. Following the conclusion of the judgment subject to a retrial is apparent or obvious in records in this court.
B on December 8, 2009, his father C transferred the Gangnam-gu Seoul Gangnam-gu apartment E, and on May 31, 2010, he reported one household non-taxation tax to the director of the Namyang-gu Tax Office.
C After the death of April 2, 2010 by the C, the director of the Namyang District Tax Office is exempt from the transfer of the said D apartment on August 1, 2011.
On August 31, 2011, the term of payment was set on August 31, 201 to B, F, and G, who are children of the network C, and notified that KRW 278,398,150 of the capital gains tax on the said D apartment shall be jointly paid (hereinafter “instant disposition”), and around that time, the notice was delivered to B.
B. B shared consultations with the Defendant on March 5, 2012, and completed the registration of transfer of ownership on the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “J apartment”) to the Defendant based on the division of property as of March 5, 2012.
C. The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant seeking revocation of the ownership transfer registration of J Apartment as to the instant J Apartment by setting the tax claim based on the instant disposition as the preserved claim, and by cancelling the above property division contract and restoring the ownership transfer registration thereof to its original state (Korean Government High Court Decision 2013Da503727).
The first instance court determined part of the judgment as a fraudulent act, and revoked the division of property as of March 5, 2012, which was concluded with respect to one-half of the J apartment of this case, and sentenced the Defendant to implement the procedure for cancellation of ownership transfer registration as to one-half of the J apartment of this case.
Accordingly, the defendant appealed against the defendant and filed an appeal with the District Court 2014Na51313, but the appellate court rendered a judgment subject to a retrial that dismissed the defendant's appeal on September 10, 2015.
In other words, the Defendant re-appealed to the Supreme Court Decision 2015Da240409. However, the Supreme Court dismissed the Defendant’s appeal on December 23, 2015.