There is no evidence to deem that the gift contract was forged.

If a registration has been made on any real estate, it shall be presumed that it has been made lawfully in the cause and procedure unless there are any special circumstances, and thus the party who asserts the unfair cause is liable to prove it.

Article 71 of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act

2014 Doz. 101847 Registration for cancellation of ownership

KimB et al.

Republic of Korea and three others

October 24, 2014

November 7, 2014

1. The plaintiffs' respective claims against the defendants are dismissed in entirety.

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

Cheong-gu Office

"To the plaintiff, the defendant KimCC completed on February 11, 2014 the O district court's OO branch office of OOO branch office of OO branch office of the defendant KimE branch office of OO branch office of the defendant KimE branch office of O branch office of O branch office of O branch office of O branch office of O branch office of O branch office of O branch office of O branch office of O branch office of O branch office of O branch office of O branch office of O branch office of O branch office of O branch office of 2014 with respect to the real estate listed in the attached list No. 6 and No. 7 of the attached list (hereinafter referred to as "O branch land"), the defendant Kim F branch office of O branch office of O branch office of O branch office of O branch office of O branch office of O branch office of 204, each procedure for cancellation of ownership transfer registration of O branch office of the Republic of Korea was performed, and the reason for consent cancellation of ownership transfer registration".

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The deceased KimA (hereinafter referred to as “the deceased”) died on February 20, 2014, and his heir was the deceased KimB, the husband of the deceased, and there are Defendant KimB, Plaintiff KimCC, Defendant KimD, Defendant KimE, and KimF.

B. Of the OO-dong land owned by the deceased, OO-dong land, and O-dong land, Defendant KimCC completed the registration of ownership transfer due to donations made on January 27, 2014 concerning OO-dong land on February 11, 2014, Defendant KimE shall complete the registration of ownership transfer due to donations made on January 27, 2014 for O-dong land made on February 12, 2014, Defendant KimF shall complete the registration of ownership transfer due to donations made on January 27, 2014 for O-dong land made on February 111, 2014 (hereinafter referred to as “each of the above registration of ownership transfer due to donations made on January 27, 2014”).

C. On March 3, 2014, Defendant Republic of Korea completed the registration of creation of a mortgage on the O-dong land on March 7, 2014 on the ground that Defendant KimF entered into a security provision contract with Defendant Kim FF.

[Ground for recognition] Unsatisfy

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The plaintiffs' assertion

Defendant KimCC, KimE, and Kim FF had custody of the deceased’s seal imprint, forged a gift contract in the name of the deceased and completed each of the instant registrations of ownership transfer on the land owned by the deceased, OOOOO-dong land, and OO-dong land. As such, each of the above registrations of ownership transfer should be cancelled as a cause invalidation. Since the Defendant Republic of Korea completed the registration of ownership transfer on the O-dong land in the name of Defendant Kim FF’s name, the registration of ownership transfer should be cancelled as a cause invalidation. As such, the Defendant Republic of Korea is obligated to accept the Plaintiffs’ request for cancellation of the above registration of ownership transfer on the land

B. Determination

Where a registration has been made on any real estate, it shall be presumed that it has been made lawfully in the cause and procedure unless there are any special circumstances (see Supreme Court Decision 2001Da72029, Feb. 5, 2002). Therefore, the party asserting the procedure and cause are liable to prove it.

According to the evidence Nos. 6 and 7, A’s evidence Nos. 8-1 through 6, A’s evidence Nos. 20, B’s evidence Nos. 6-1 through 12, and B’s evidence Nos. 16, the deceased expressed his/her intention to sell OO-dong land and O-dong land by visiting Defendant KimCC, KimE, KimE, KimF, and real estate brokerage offices on or around January 2014, the deceased expressed his/her intention to sell O-dong land. ② The deceased requested the tax accounting corporation on January 27, 2013 to calculate capital gains tax on the O-dong land by posting phone calls. ③ The deceased was hospitalized at the hospital on January 28, 2014, which is the grounds for the registration of transfer of ownership in this case, and the deceased was prepared and submitted as the letter of delegation of ownership by each of the deceased on January 27, 2014 to the deceased on January 21, 2014.

Meanwhile, according to the above evidence No. 1 (Gift No. 8, Eul’s certificate, Eul’s certificate No. 9-1, 2, and 3’s each statement and image, it can be recognized that the deceased expressed his/her intention to donate to defendant KimCC, KimE, and Kim F on January 31, 2014. However, the plaintiffs asserted that the above documents were forged, and there is no other evidence to support the above evidence No. 9, the above assertion is without merit), Eul’s certificate No. 5, 8, 12, 17, and Eul’s certificate No. 18-1, 2, and 3, and the above documents No. 10-1, 4 were prepared to verify the deceased’s right transfer registration. The deceased’s each statement and image No. 1, 1, 2, and 40-1, 10-1, 2, 2014, 2, 30-1, 2, 30-1, 3, respectively.

Ultimately, the above facts alone are insufficient to deem that Defendant KimCC, KimE, and KimF forged the above gift contract, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it, and the Plaintiffs’ assertion is without merit.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, each claim of the plaintiffs is dismissed in entirety as it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.