사해행위 해당 여부[국승]
Whether it constitutes a fraudulent act
The disposal of the instant real estate constitutes a fraudulent act detrimental to the interests of creditors by causing a lack of common security of creditors or making a lack of common security already in the state of shortage more than one story.
Article 30 of the National Tax Collection Act Revocation of Fraudulent Act
§ 406. Revocation of Civil Code
1. The sales contract is revoked on February 20, 2005 on each real estate listed in the separate sheet between the defendant and Yellow ○○.
2. The defendant will implement the procedure for cancellation registration of ownership transfer registration completed on March 25, 2005 by the receipt No. 3785 with respect to each real estate listed in the separate sheet to the plaintiff.
3. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant.
Cheong-gu Office
The same shall apply to the order.
1. Basic facts
A. Yellow ○ filed a tax return on value-added tax from 2002 to 2004 and received a notice from the tax authority to pay taxes of KRW 84,834,750 in total.
B. On February 20, 2005, Yellow ○ entered into a contract to sell each real estate listed in the separate sheet on its ownership to the Defendant, who is the death money, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on March 25 of the same year.
C. In addition to the above real estate, ○○○○○○-dong 000 00 00 - 000 - and 1997 - with respect to the above apartment house with the market price of KRW 16 million, the maximum debt amount of KRW 72 million was set, and the business of '○○' with the trade name of '○○' operated by Y○○○ was closed on December 31, 2004.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 to 7 evidence (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
According to the above facts of recognition, the disposal of each of the above real estate by Yellow ○○ constitutes a fraudulent act detrimental to the interests of creditors by causing a lack of joint security for creditors, including the plaintiff, or making the lack of joint security already in the state of shortage. It is also presumed that YO, a debtor, was a disposal act to the defendant for the purpose of detrimental to the plaintiff while he was sufficiently aware or could have been aware of the occurrence of the plaintiff's tax claim, and as long as YO's intent of damage is recognized, it is presumed that the defendant, a beneficiary
The defendant asserts that the above real estate was originally purchased by 24 persons, including the defendant, for the purpose of joint investment for the ○○○○○ ○○ ○○ ○○ ○○ ○○ ○○ ○○ ○○ ○○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○.
3. Conclusion
If so, the plaintiff's claim shall be accepted for the reasons and it is so decided as per Disposition.