2. The defendant shall implement the procedure for the registration of transfer of ownership on the real estate listed in the attached list to the non-party Kim Jong-○ for restitution due to the revocation of fraudulent act.

3. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant.

2. Judgment without holding any pleadings (Article 208 (3) 1 of the Civil Procedure Act);

Grounds of Claim

1. Formation of tax claims;

A. The non-party ○○○○○○○○○○-dong ○○○○○○-dong ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ through June 9, 2004 and August 27, 2004, the non-party ○○○○○ has received processed purchase data in the year 2002 to 2003 from the non-party ○○○○○○○, which had engaged in a credit business on a mutual basis, in order to estimate the omission of global income tax based on inclusion of the non-party ○○’s processed purchase data in the necessary expenses for the non-party ○○○○○○○○’s processed purchase data. The non-party ○○○○○, which has been notified of KRW 184,329,260 for the payment period on October 31, 2005 and has not been paid until now, are as follows:

(unit: Won and surcharges: base date on April 13, 06)

Sub-Items :

Year of Reversion

Date of establishment of tax liability;

Deadline for payment

Notice Tax Amount

Additional dues system

Consolidateds

Global Income Tax

202

December 31, 2002

oly 31, 2005

150,799,150

13,571,870

164,371,020

Global Income Tax

2003

December 31, 2003

oly 31, 2005

3,530,110

3,017,700

36,547,810

Consolidateds

184,329,260

16,589,570

200,918,830

2. Fraudulent act;

The non-party ○○○ who was confirmed on the data and accused of the fact that he received the purchase data of KRW 329,700,000,000 for the year 2003, which was reverted to 2002 from ○○○○○○○○○ in charge of the acquisition of the data from 329,000,000,000, which was confirmed on the data, and accordingly, the non-party ○○○○ in charge of the national tax was anticipated to be notified of the global income tax according to this fact, and the real estate recorded on his attached list was transferred to ○○○, a spouse (her spouse), on his punishment (her spouse), on March 24, 2005, with the receipt number of ○○○ District Court ○○○○○○○ and ○○○○○○○○○○ in charge of the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of trading under No. 1004, Oct. 18, 2005.

3. Reduction of responsible property;

On February 25, 2005, the market price of the real estate at the time of this case, which is the only secondary property at the time of the fraudulent act by Nonparty 1 Kim○-○, the debtor in arrears, was 46,624,400 won, and there is no debt. Thus, on March 24, 2005, ○○○ District Court 100 ○○○○○○○ registry office (104,000 won) reduced the liability property by completing the registration of ownership transfer to the beneficiary ○○○○○ on the ground of sale.

3. Excess of debts;

(a) Active property;

At the time of fraudulent act, the real estate value of the instant real estate, which is the non-party in arrears Kim ○○, is KRW 46,624,400.

B. Petty property

The debtor's small property at the time of the speculative act shall not be limited to KRW 184,329,260, the amount of national tax claim established.

(c) Debt excess;

The real estate in this case was transferred and caused the excess of 46,624,400 won.

4. The doctor of the private will;

The non-party debtor Kim ○ has received processed purchase data for the purpose of evading taxes and filed a false tax return, and due to that fact, it is expected that high-amount of national taxes will be imposed on himself, and that this case's real estate owned by himself will be transferred to Park ○○ who is the spouse of the punishment, and the beneficiary of this case, who is the spouse of the punishment, transferred it to ○○. Thus, it is an act knowing that national

5. Bad faith of beneficiaries and defendants;

The beneficiary Park Jong-○ was the birth of the spouse of the non-party in arrears, who was the birth of the non-party in his spouse on February 25, 2005. In addition, after the transfer of ownership, Park○-○ had known that the registration of the transfer of ownership on the real estate in this case to Kim○-○, the father of the non-party Kim○-○, was the birth of the non-party in his spouse on February 25, 2005.

5. Conclusion;

In light of these facts, the act of transfer of ownership by the sale of the instant real estate by Nonparty Kim○, who was aware that it would prejudice the Plaintiff, constitutes a fraudulent act committed while Defendant Kim○, a subsequent purchaser, and the act of transferring the ownership of the instant real estate from the beneficiary Park○, was known to the effect that the act of transferring the ownership of the instant real estate was prejudicial to national tax claims. Therefore, under Article 30 of the National Tax Collection Act, the Plaintiff sought the cancellation of the real estate sales contract between Nonparty Kim○ and Park○, pursuant to the provision of Article 30 of the National Tax Collection Act, and filed this lawsuit to return

The indication of one building

○○○○-si ○○○○-dong ○○○, ○○-○, ○○-○○

A reinforced concrete structure and a brick spab

House of roof 4 stories

Indication of land which is the object of site ownership

1. ○○○○○○○-dong ○○○-dong ○○○-○○ 384 square meters;

Indication of the building for exclusive use

Second floor No. 202 53.13 square meters of reinforced concrete structure

Indication of Site Ownership

2.17/384 of the right to the site of ownership.