beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On July 1, 2011, B: (a) sold a building with a size of 660 square meters and a building on land (hereinafter “each of the instant real estate”) as the purchase price of KRW 1.266 million; and (b) completed the registration of ownership transfer; (c) the head of the Dongyangyang District Office determined and notified the said transfer to B as of June 30, 201, the transfer income tax amounting to KRW 143,795,700 pertaining to the said transfer as of June 30, 2012; (d) determined and notified the said transfer as of June 30, 2013; and (e) the director of the Sinyang District Office determined and notified the said transfer as the payment deadline of KRW 3,101,69 as of June 30, 2013; and (e) the director of the Sinyang District Office determined and notified the said amount of value-added tax as of September 30, 2011.
B. B received KRW 362,752,617 out of the purchase price of each of the instant real estate on July 1, 2011, and paid KRW 25 million out of the said money to the Defendant, who is his/her father, on July 2, 2011 (hereinafter “the instant money”).
[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5, purport of whole pleadings
2. Determination on the cause of the claim
A. The gift constitutes a gift, and thus, the gift should be revoked as a fraudulent act, and the defendant is obliged to pay the above amount and delay damages to the plaintiff due to restitution to its original state.
B. If a debtor donated his/her own property to another person under excess of his/her obligation, such act constitutes a fraudulent act, barring special circumstances (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 97Da57320, May 12, 1998; 2006Da11494, May 11, 2006). In cases where a creditor seeking revocation of a fraudulent act claims that the debtor’s act of paying the money to the beneficiary was a gift to the beneficiary, the beneficiary asserts that it was received as a repayment for the existing obligation, this would be the denial of the creditor’s assertion.