Eastern Branch 2012Ga group 203425 ( October 29, 2012)

If a tax disposition cannot be deemed to be null and void as a matter of course, it shall be effective until the tax disposition is lawfully revoked.

As long as a taxation disposition cannot be deemed to be null and void as it is reasonable, even if there are illegal grounds for revocation of the taxation disposition, such taxation disposition shall be deemed valid until it is lawfully revoked. Therefore, the validity of the taxation disposition in civil procedure shall not be denied.

Article 30 of the National Tax Collection Act

2012 Ghana 203425 Revocation of Fraudulent Act

Korea

1.A 2.GovernmentB

June 13, 2012

June 29, 2012

1. On January 24, 2011, with respect to the real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1 between Defendant AA and the highestCC, and with respect to the real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 2 between Defendant AA and the largestCC, revocation of the self-donation agreement on October 5, 201.

2. The real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1 shall be registered to the largestCC, and the defendant AA shall implement each procedure for the cancellation of ownership transfer registration completed on February 1, 201 with respect to the real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 5831, which was completed on February 1, 201 by the Southern Branch of the Busan District Court, the Southern Branch of the District Court, and the defendant AB, with respect to the real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 2, which was completed on October 10, 201 by the Chang

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

Cheong-gu Office

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Basic facts

Defendant AAA’s mother, Defendant AB’s spouse, and CB’s receipt of penalty for cancellation related to the vested project in 2009 was not reported by DD on January 30, 201, and it was treated as representative recognition, and notified of changes in the amount of income on November 30, 2010 to the largest director, and notified the OOOOO personnel, but the largestCC did not pay the income tax, and the largestCC did not have any other assets than each real estate listed in the attached list in the attached list 1. The Busan District Court’s Busan District Court’s receipt on January 24, 201 with respect to the real estate listed in the attached list 1 by donation on February 1, 2011, and the registration of ownership transfer was not made on February 1, 2011 through 581, and each of the parties’ receipt of the gift was made on February 16, 2011 through 10.201.

2. Determination

According to the above facts, the highestCC donated each real estate listed in the separate sheet to the Defendants in excess of its obligation, so each donation contract constitutes a fraudulent act detrimental to the general creditors including the Plaintiff, and the Defendants' bad faith as beneficiaries is presumed.

As to this, the Defendants, as well as the actual company of DD, are E, and the LCC is a FF employee of FF operated by EE, and the LCC is the representative director of DD. Therefore, the LCC asserts that the LCC's most tax disposition is unfair. However, as long as the tax disposition cannot be deemed null and void, even if there is any illegal ground that can be revoked on the tax disposition, the tax disposition is valid until the tax disposition is lawfully revoked. Therefore, it cannot be denied the validity of the tax disposition in the civil procedure due to the circumstances asserted by the Defendants, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this. Therefore, the Defendants' assertion is without merit.

Therefore, each gift contract of this case is a fraudulent act, so it should be revoked, and the defendants are obligated to implement the procedure for cancellation registration of each transfer of ownership on each real estate listed in the separate sheet as a performance of the obligation to reinstate.

3. Conclusion

Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case against the defendants is accepted with merit.