Seoul Northern District Court-2017-Annex-23213 ( November 08, 2018)

Whether a fraudulent act is committed

The real estate sales contract between the delinquent taxpayer and the defendant constitutes a fraudulent act, and the delinquent taxpayer was aware that such an act was prejudicial to the general creditor, and it is not possible to recognize the defendants' good faith.

Article 30 of the National Tax Collection Act

Seoul High Court 2018Na2069135 Revocation of Fraudulent Act

Korea

AAA and one other

oly 22, 2019

o2, 2019.12

1. All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

3. In the case of the first instance court’s judgment, “Balebry 2807-6” in attached Table 2 subparag. 4, shall be corrected to “Balebry 2807-5.”

1. Purport of claim

(a) As to the real estate listed in the annex No. 1 List:

1) The sales contract concluded on September 30, 2016 between CCC and Defendant AAA is revoked; and

2) Defendant AA will implement the procedure for registration cancellation of ownership transfer registration that was completed on October 4, 2016 by the Seoul Northern District Court DD registry office of the Seoul Northern District Court (Seoul Northern District Court) and completed under Article 64771.

B. As to each real estate listed in the Schedule of Attached 2 Real Estate:

1) The sales contract concluded on September 30, 2016 between CCC and Defendant FF was revoked; and

2) Defendant FF was completed by the Jeju District Court No. 108297, Oct. 4, 2016, with CCC as of October 4, 2016

The procedure for the cancellation registration of each transfer of ownership shall be implemented.

2. Purport of appeal

The judgment of the first instance is revoked. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasoning of this case is as follows, except for the following modifications, and therefore, this case is accepted in accordance with Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act (it is reasonable to make the first instance judgment accepting the Plaintiff’s claim even if both the Defendant’s assertion and the evidence submitted are examined).

○ In the second sentence of the third sentence of the first instance judgment, the phrase “7,864,667,530 won for conversion” is amended to read “7,864,67,530 won for conversion value”.

○ Amendment of the 10th judgment of the first instance court to " September 1, 2015" of the 10th judgment to " August 12, 2015."

2. Conclusion

As the judgment of the court of first instance is justifiable, all appeals by the Defendants are dismissed, but the "Baleeee 2807-6" in paragraph (4) of attached Table 2 of the judgment of the court of first instance is clear that it is a clerical error in the "Bale 2807-5", and thus, it is decided as per the disposition to correct it ( even if Defendant AA examines the written application for coal submitted by January 29, 2019 after the closing of argument, it is difficult to reverse the above judgment).