1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Basic facts

A. Through a foreign exchange planning and investigation on the export amount and omission of zero-rate sales from 2007 to 2010 of the company’s “D” operated by C, the head of the sericultural Tax Office under the Plaintiff-affiliated Tax Office imposed C totaling KRW 707,256,860 from July 11, 2012 and December 7, 2012 to KRW 707,256,860 from 207 to 2010. The head of the Gangnam-dong Tax Office imposed C the total of KRW 16,03,470 from 207 to 2010 (specific details of imposition are as stated in the separate sheet), and C did not pay the above taxes up to KRW 832,535,340 from 207 to 2012.

B. The registration of ownership transfer was completed on the gift made on May 16, 2012 by Hongcheon District Court No. 11399 on May 17, 2012, Hongcheon District Court, Hongcheon District Court, Hongcheon District Court, as the husband of C, with respect to the land of this case (hereinafter “instant land”).

C. The instant land is the only real estate owned by C, and C is at the time of completing the registration of transfer of ownership as described in B, and is in excess of obligations up to now.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap 1 to 7 evidence, purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of the claim, while C bears a tax obligation against the Plaintiff (each tax obligation occurred between June 30, 2007 and December 31, 2010), and around May 16, 2012, the donation of the instant land to the Defendant constitutes a fraudulent act, and thus, it shall be revoked. Accordingly, the Defendant shall be obliged to implement the procedure for cancellation of ownership transfer registration as to the instant land, with regard to restitution to its original state.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. On May 10, 2005, the instant land asserted 1 as to the assertion on title trust is the land on which the Defendant assumed and purchased the purchase price on its own, but only the name of the registration was registered, and the Defendant terminated the title trust agreement around May 2012.