사해행위취소 등[국승]
Revocation, etc. of Fraudulent Act
The sales contract for the real estate stated in the attached list shall be revoked, and the procedure for registration cancellation of transfer of ownership shall be implemented (Conclusion of Unclaimed Pleadings)
Article 30 of the National Tax Collection Act
1. The sales contract concluded on March 17, 2005 between the defendant and the non-party 100 is revoked.
2. The defendant shall implement the procedure for the cancellation registration of transfer of ownership, which was completed on March 21, 2005 by ○○ District Court ○○ ○○ ○980, which was received on March 21, 2005 with respect to the real estate listed in the attached list No. 10981, which was completed on March 21, 2005 with respect to the real estate listed in the attached list No. 10982, which was completed on March 21, 2005, with respect to the real estate listed in the attached list No. 10982, which was completed on March 21, 2005.
3. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant.
The same shall apply to the order.
1. Basic facts
Each entry in the evidence Nos. 1 through 5 (including each number), and the purport of the whole pleadings (including each number)
A. The Plaintiff, on October 31, 2004, notified 817,130 won of value-added tax as the payment period, on October 31, 2004, on the grounds that Nonparty 1, 2004, who operates ○○ ○ ○○ ○○ ○○ ○○ ○○ ○○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
B. On March 21, 2005, after receiving the notice of the above value-added tax payment, on March 21, 2005, 2005, ○○○ District Court’s ○○○○ registry office on March 21, 2005 as to each of the real estates listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “each of the instant real estates”) as one’s sole property on March 21, 2005, received the registration of ownership transfer under each of the Defendant’s name on March 21, 2005.
2. Determination
According to the above facts, around March 2005, ○○○, which was liable to the Plaintiff for an amount equivalent to KRW 35 million, converted the act of selling each of the real estate of this case, which is the only property owned by the Plaintiff, into money which is easily consumed by selling it to the Defendant, constitutes a fraudulent act in relation to the Plaintiff, which is the obligee, and the Defendant’s bad faith as the beneficiary is presumed.
Therefore, since the sales contract concluded on March 17, 2005 with respect to each of the instant real estate between the Defendant and YO is a fraudulent act, it is revoked, and the Defendant is obliged to implement the procedure for registration cancellation of each transfer of ownership to the Plaintiff as to each of the said real estate due to the cancellation of fraudulent act.
3. Conclusion
Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition.