A. Revocation of a contract of gift dated May 30, 2005 entered into between the defendant and ○○○.

B. The defendant shall execute the procedure for the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of the restoration of the true name with the ○○○○.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

3. Paragraph 1 can be provisionally executed.

2. Judgment by service (Article 208 (3) 3 of the Civil Procedure Act).

Grounds of Claim

1. The relationship between Nonparty ○○ and the Defendant

피고는 국세체납자 소외 ○○○의 처로서 부부관계입니다.(갑 제1호증의 1,2 ＇호 적등본＇,＇가구사항조회＇)

2. Formation of a taxation claim which is a preserved claim;

A. From July 10, 1992 to December 31, 2004, Nonparty ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○, a person who has run a plastic product manufacturing business.

B. Although the entrepreneur must faithfully report the tax in accordance with the relevant laws and regulations and pay the relevant national tax voluntarily, Nonparty ○○○ had paid the national tax related to the operation of the above business by including the amount of the input tax deduction and the amount of the tax on global income tax return for the taxable year 2003 and 2004 in the manner of including the amount of the tax deduction and the amount of the tax on global income tax deduction.

다. 원고 산하 ○○○세무서장은, 소외 ○○○이 부가가치세 신고시 실제 물품을 구입하지 않고 세금계산서만을 수취하여 매입세액을 공제하는 방법으로 부가가치 세를 부당하게 공제한 사실을 확인하고 이 사실에 대하여 2005.7.31.납부기한으로 부가가치세 2004년 제1기 과세기간분(납세의무성립일：2004.6.30.) 9,350,510원 및 2005.10.31.납부기한으로 2004년 제1기 과세기간분(납세의무성립일： 2004.6.30) 4,285,170원 부가가치세 합계 13,635,680원을 경정고지 하였으나, 소 외 ○○○은 이를 납부하지 않았습니다.(갑 제2호증의 1,＇부가가치세 납세자별 고 지내역 조회＇)

라. 그리고 소득세 관할인 원고 산하 △△△세무서장은 소외 ○○○이 상기 부가 가치세 신고시 물품구입 없이 세금계산서만 수취하여 부가가치세를 부당하게 공제 신고하고 동일한 금액을 종합소득세 신고시에도 필요경비로 부당공제 신고한 것에 대하여 필요경비를 부인하는 등을 원인으로 2005.8.31. 납부기한으로 2004년 과세 연도분(납세의무성립일：2004.12.31) 2,807,120원 2005.9.30.납부기한으로 2003 년 과세연도분(납세의무성립일：2003.12.31) 8,902,990원 2006.1.31.납부기한으로 2004년 과세연도분(납세의무성립일：2004.12.31) 23,561,070원 및 2006.2.28.납 부기한으로 2004년 과세연도분(납세의무성립일：2004.12.31) 13,020,660원 종합 소득세 합계 48,291,840원을 경정고지 하였으나,(갑 제2호증의 2,＇종합소득세 납 세자별 고지내역 조회＇) 이 또한 소외 ○○○은 납부하지 않고 있으며, 현재 체납 된 국세가 67,281,540원(가산금포함)에 이르고 있습니다.

3. Fraudulent act;

A. The non-party ○○ is highly likely to notify the near future national taxes due to the fact that the tax liability had already been established in relation to the operation of the above business in 2003 and 2004 on the pertinent portion of the taxable year, including the restriction on the input tax of unfair value-added tax and necessary expenses.

나. 자신 소유의 유일한 재산인 별지 목록 기재 부동산(이하 ＇이 사건 부동산＇이 라 합니다)에 대하여 2005.5.30.자 증여계약을 원인으로 2005.6.2. ○○지방법원 등기과 접수 제○○○○○호로 처인 피고에게 소유권이전등기 경료함으로써(갑 제 3호증 ＇이 사건 부동산 등기부등본＇)소외 ○○○은 무자력이 되었으며, 이로써 원고는 조세채권의 만족을 얻지 못하는 결과에 이르게 되었습니다.

다. 위 고액의 국세가 고지될 고도의 개연성은 위 ○○○세무서장 및 △△△세무 서장이 ＇2＇,＇다＇,＇라＇,항의 국세를 고지함으로써 현실로 실현되었으나, 소외 ○○○은 고지된 고액의 국세를 현재까지도 전혀 납부하지 아니하고 있습니다.

The act of Non-Party ○○ transferred the ownership of the instant real estate, which is the only property owned by himself/herself, in view of the fact that a high-amount national tax is expected to be notified of the fact that a high-amount national tax was reported on the illegal tax credit for global income tax (the establishment of tax liability) and the fact that the purchaser of the said sub-Dongsan was his/her own wife, and the act of Nonparty ○○○ transferred the ownership of the instant real estate to the Defendant, which is the property of his/her own property value, is not paid upon notification of national taxes to him/her.

4. Intention and bad faith of the defendant;

The non-party ○○ is highly probable to notify the near future of the high-amount national tax, and the real estate of this case, which is the only property with property value owned by himself, was known to the defendant at the time of transfer of ownership due to the increase in the ownership transfer. The defendant, as the wife of the non-party ○○○, should be deemed to have known the fact that this transfer was fraudulent act and the intention of the non-party ○○○○’s deliberation.

5. Whether the pertinent real estate is a well-grounded property

원고 산하 △△△세무서장이 체납처분 목적으로 소외 ○○○에 대한 재산조사를 한 바, ＇재산등 자료현황표＇(갑 제4호증) 및 ○○시 ○○구 ○○동 ○○-○ 토지 및 건물 등기부〔갑 제5호증의 1,2 ＇등기부등본＇,채권자의 청구채권 과다(채권자 소외 신용보증기금 등 318,480천원)로 재산적 가치 없음〕에서 나타난 바와 같이 이 사건 부동산이 소외 ○○○의 재산적 가치 있는 유일한 재산이라 할 것입니다.

6. The date on which he becomes aware of a fraudulent act;

The plaintiff was issued on May 9, 2006 a certified copy of the register of the real estate of this case to execute the disposition on default against the non-party ○○○, for which the registration of ownership transfer was made in the name of the defendant, and he became aware of the fraudulent act of this case.

7. Conclusion

In light of the above facts, the act of Nonparty ○○○’s act of completing the registration of ownership transfer to the Defendant, who is the wife on the ground of donation, constitutes a fraudulent act, which is an act of knowing that it would prejudice the Plaintiff, who is the obligee, in order to evade tax liability.

In accordance with Article 406 of the Civil Act and Article 30 of the National Tax Collection Act, the plaintiff has reached the claim as stated in the purport of the claim.