District Court-2017-Gohap-56322 ( August 29, 2018)
Whether it constitutes a fraudulent act
(1) As such, inasmuch as the gift to the Defendant was aware of the fact that its financial status is insufficient to secure the obligees’ claims, including the Plaintiff, and that the risk of the Plaintiff being unable to receive the repayment of claims arises, the intention of deception is recognized, and the Defendants’ bad faith, which is the beneficiary, is presumed.
Article 30 of the National Tax Collection Act: Revocation and Restoration of Fraudulent Act
2018Na2051479 Revocation of Fraudulent Act
Suwon District Court Decision 2017Gahap56322 Decided August 29, 2018
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
1. Purport of claim
A contract of gift of KRW 436,00,000 entered into on June 23, 2014 between the Defendant and ○○○ shall be revoked.
The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 436,00,000 won with 5% interest per annum from the day following the day when this judgment became final and conclusive to the day of full payment.
2. Purport of appeal
The part concerning the defendant in the judgment of the first instance shall be revoked. The plaintiff's claim against the defendant shall be dismissed.
1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;
The reasoning for the court's explanation concerning this case is the same as the part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it refers to the same as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the
Therefore, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant of this case shall be accepted for the reasons, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just in its conclusion, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.