The ownership transfer of the instant real estate constitutes a fraudulent act committed with knowledge that it would prejudice the creditor.

The delinquent taxpayer and the plaintiff were living together in the same address as they were simplified, and they knew that the gift of this case was a fraudulent act and that the plaintiff's claim was infringed.

Article 30 of the National Tax Collection Act

2012 Ghana 501160 Revocation of Fraudulent Act

Korea

LAA

Pleadings without Oral Proceedings

May 16, 2012

1. The contract of donation concluded on May 24, 2010 with respect to real estate in the separate sheet between the defendant and the non-party leastA shall be revoked.

2. The defendant will implement the procedure to cancel the registration of transfer of ownership, which was completed on May 28, 2010 by the receipt No. 18898, with respect to the real estate listed in the separate sheet to the largestA.

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

The same shall apply to the order.

1. The reasons for the request shall be as specified in the Annex of the Request.

2. Judgment without holding any pleadings (Article 11208 (3) 1 of the Civil Procedure Act);

Grounds of Claim

1. A preserved tax claim;

The plaintiff's taxation claims are as follows:

On April 16, 2007, Nonparty LA reported self-farmland reduction and exemption at KRW 000,000, 598 square meters in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Gwangju, and 000,000,000,000,000,0000,0000,000,0000,000,0000,0000,0000,000,0000,0000,0000,0000,0000,0000,0000,0000,0000,0000,000,0000,0000,0000,000,0000,000,0000,000,0000,000,0000,000,000,000,000,00,00.

2. Fraudulent act;

In the event that Nonparty 1 is in arrears as described in paragraph 1, it is anticipated that the Plaintiff’s property will be seized due to the disposition on default, and on May 24, 2010, the agreement on donation on the date (hereinafter referred to as “instant real property”) stated in the attached Table as the grounds for registration was made to the Jeju District Court, Seopopo District Court No. 18898 dated 28, 2010, issued to Nonparty 1898 the title registration to Nonparty 2-3.

3. The intention of an injury.

A. Bad faith of Nonparty LA

The plaintiff's disposition on default on the real estate of this case was anticipated, and the non-party 1 knew that the creditor's fraudulent act was not sufficient to satisfy his claim at the time of his donation to the defendant MaximumD.

B. Non-party LA’s insolvency

(i)affirmative property;

At the time of donation of the instant real property on May 24, 2010, Nonparty LA’s active property at the time of donation of the instant real property is KRW 000,000 according to the present list of data, such as property, etc., computerized data of the National Tax Service. (Evidence A-1 through 2-6)

(2) Petty property

As the Plaintiff’s claim amounting to KRW 000, Nonparty LA donated real estate in excess of the obligation ( KRW 000 - KRW 000 = 000) under the attached list, thereby reducing the liability property of KRW 000 and preventing the obligee’s claims, including the Plaintiff.

4. Bad faith of Defendant MaximumD

Defendant LAD was a person of Nonparty LA, who was residing in the same domicile at the time of his fraudulent act, and was aware of the fact that the instant real estate donation was a fraudulent act and that the Plaintiff’s claim was infringed. (Nos. 3-1 through 3-3)

5. Conclusion;

In light of the above facts, the transfer of ownership on the ground of the gift of the instant real estate to Defendant MaximumD by the LAA to the Defendant constitutes a fraudulent act with the knowledge that it would prejudice the obligee, and the Defendant also received the gift of the instant real estate with the knowledge of such fact, and thus, I would like to request the Defendant to cancel the registration of ownership on the ground of the gift made in the future.