15. The reservation to trade concluded on October 28, 201 and the cancellation of a sales contract concluded on October 28, 201, respectively.

2. The defendant will implement the procedure for the cancellation of each registration of transfer of ownership, which was made by the Daejeon District Court No. 16552 on October 22, 201 with respect to each of the real property listed in the separate sheet No. 1 and No. 1, the registration of transfer of ownership, which was made on November 8, 201 by the receipt of No. 18730 on November 8, 201 of the same registry office, and which was made on November 28, 201 by the receipt of No. 19769 on November 28, 2011.

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

2. Judgment without holding any pleadings (Articles 208 (3) 1 and 257 of the Civil Procedure Act);

Grounds of Claim

1. Formation of preserved claims;

(a) Circumstances of taxation;

The director of the Daejeon District Tax Office under the plaintiff notified the non-party A(hereinafter referred to as "the non-party A") to the non-party A for the transfer income tax for the year 2004 and the non-party A for the global income tax for the year 2000, but does not pay national taxes until the date of the filing of the lawsuit.

B. Establishment of preserved claims

Tax claims are legally established when the taxation requirements prescribed by tax law are met, and capital gains tax is paid by preliminary return as income tax, the last day of the month in which the amount forming the tax base occurs, and global income tax is established at the time of the termination of the taxable period, so tax liability has already been established prior to the date of fraudulent act (the reservation date of October 15, 2010).

2. Fraudulent act;

On October 22, 2010, the debtor completed the registration of transfer of ownership in the name of the defendant on the ground of sale as of November 8, 2011, No. 18730 of the receipt of the registration office of the Daejeon District Court No. 16552, No. 1652, which is the sole owner of the attached list B (hereinafter referred to as “instant real estate”), with respect to the real estate listed in the attached Table B (hereinafter referred to as “the instant real estate”), as of October 28, 201, on the ground of the provisional registration on the ground of a pre-sale agreement as of October 15, 201, No. 18730, No. 19769, Oct. 28, 2011.

3. The intention of an injury.

(a) Facts of the harm caused by death;

채무자는 고양세무서 조사시 2010년 3월 25일 확인서를 작성하고, 종합소득세가 과세될 것을 알았으며, 또한 2010년 10월 성남세무서 양도소득세 조사실시로 (조사기간 2010.10.11.-2010.10.25) 양도소득세가 고지할 것을 알고 위 국세체납에 따른 압류등의 체납처분을 면하고자 원고를 해함을 알면서 2010년 10월 22얼 피고에게 매매예약 가등기하게 한 후 2011년 11월 8일, 2011년 11월 28일 그의 유일 재산인 이 사건 부동산에 대하여 피고 유BB 명의로 소유권이전등기를 경료한 것이라 할 것이고, 피고 유BB는 채무자의 동서(同壻)로 그 정을 알았다 할 것입니다. (갑 제3호증 1 내지 3, 갑 제4호증)

(b) Insolvent;

The debtor registered the transfer of ownership to the defendant UB as of October 22, 2010 on the ground of the reservation to purchase and sell the instant real estate on October 15, 201, under the receipt of the Geumsan District Court of Daejeon District on the receipt of the registration office, No. 16552, and the registration office No. 18730 of the same registration office on October 28, 2011, and No. 19769 of the receipt of the registration office No. 18730 of the same registration office on the ground of trade on October 28, 2011, and the debtor was in a state of unclaimed due to the said fraudulent act (Evidence No. 1 and No. 2 of the same Act).

(c) Acknowledgement of fraudulent act

As such, the Plaintiff became aware on December 7, 201 that the instant real estate had been registered in the name of the Defendant for ownership transfer registration was conducted in the course of the obligor’s tracking investigation.

4. Bad faith of the defendant

The defendant and the debtor had no other property in addition to the real estate in this case, and the defendant should be deemed to have known the fact that this sale of the real estate in this case was a fraudulent act and that the debtor had known the debtor's will to understand at the time of receipt of the real estate in this case.

5. Conclusion

Therefore, in view of the above facts, the sales contract on the real estate of this case between the debtor and defendant UB was concluded with the knowledge that it would prejudice the plaintiff, who is the tax payer, to be exempted from the disposition of default on national taxes imposed by the director of Daecheon Tax Office under the jurisdiction of the plaintiff, and the defendant UB is obligated to implement the procedure for cancellation of ownership transfer registration in the name of the defendant, which was completed with respect to the real estate of this case, in accordance with Article 30 of the National Tax Collection Act, so the defendant UB is obligated to file an objection against its cancellation