2017Na52755 (Counterclaim Damages)

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) by aggregating the principal lawsuit and the counterclaim.

3. He/she shall correct " January 29, 201" in paragraph (2) of the order of the court of first instance to " November 29, 201".

Main Action: The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff; hereinafter referred to as “Defendant”) received on November 29, 201 from Nonparty CC on real estate stated in the separate sheet by the DD District Court FF branch FF branch of the DD District Court with respect to the FF branch of the FF branch of the DD District Court.

The procedure for registration of cancellation of the provisional registration of the right to claim ownership transfer completed by 160901 is implemented.

Counterclaim: The plaintiff (the counter defendant; hereinafter referred to as the "Plaintiff") shall pay to the defendant 24,719,170 won with 15% interest per annum from the day following the delivery of a duplicate of the counterclaim of this case to the day of complete payment (the defendant has reduced the claim for the counterclaim by withdrawing the principal claim, the claim for the performance of the procedures for cancellation of the provisional registration, the claim for the implementation of the procedures for cancellation of the provisional registration, and the claim for procedural expenses).

2. Purport of appeal

The part against the defendant in the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked. The plaintiff's claim for the principal lawsuit shall be dismissed, and the judgment shall be sought such as the statement of claim

The reasoning of this Court concerning this case is to delete the part of Paragraph (1) from the judgment of the first instance as to the counterclaim claim under Section 5, Paragraph (3) of Article 5 of the judgment of the first instance, and to add the following judgment, and therefore, it is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance. Therefore, it is to accept it as it is

2. Additional determination

The Defendant asserts that the instant taxation disposition imposed on CC, which did not inherit the property, is unlawful and significant, and thus invalid. However, considering the following: (a) in a lawsuit seeking revocation of a fraudulent act between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, the Plaintiff’s partial winning judgment that was premised on the validity of the instant taxation disposition has become final and conclusive; and (b) the Defendant’s assertion against the head of GGG Tax Office the illegality of the taxation disposition, such as inheritance tax, but did not receive it, the evidence submitted by the Defendant alone

As such, a taxation that cannot be deemed null and void as a matter of course is valid until it is legally revoked by the fairness and executory power of administrative act, and the validity of such taxation in civil procedure cannot be denied. Therefore, the defendant's assertion that there is no preserved right is groundless.

3. Conclusion

If so, the judgment of the court of first instance is justifiable, and the appeal against the defendant's principal lawsuit and counterclaim is without merit.

All of them are dismissed, and in paragraph 2 of the disposition of the court of first instance, " January 29, 201" is obviously a mistake of " November 29, 201", and such error is corrected.

- 5-