Revocation of Fraudulent Act

(1) The act of making a donation to his or her parent of real estate in excess of his or her liability constitutes a fraudulent act

Article 406 of the Civil Act

Suwon District Court 2014Gadan2208894

Korea

Tong-Jin-Jin Park

June 24, 2015

July 15, 2016

1. Facts of recognition;

A. Nonparty AA: (a) on November 16, 2012, 201, 504-5, 301 square meter and ground on the valley-dong, Suwon-si, Suwon-si;

Article 6 (Construction of Iron) Class 2 neighborhood living facilities and multi-household dwelling facilities (hereinafter referred to as "second class neighborhood living facilities") of 6 floors of

The building of this case shall be referred to as "the building of this case" and the part of the site shall be referred to as "the real estate of this case"

BB and Daehan enter into a sales contract for selling the purchase price of KRW 1,656,50,000 for 1,656,500,000; and

and after receiving KRW 376,50,000 after deducting gold and deposits, the ownership shall be held by the BB and CCC

The transfer registration was made and made (hereinafter referred to as the "sale of this case").

(b) AA was received through the instant transaction from November 19, 2012 to April 16, 2013.

each contract of gift in the separate sheet (hereinafter referred to as "the contract of gift in this case") shall be included in the

309,507,00 won was paid to the defendant who is his or her father and wife.

C. AA on February 10, 2013, with respect to the instant sales to the Plaintiff, a neighborhood living facility and a multi-household with respect to the instant sales

The capital gains tax shall be voluntarily applied to one household's non-taxation for two-use houses that are a house;

After reporting and paying capital gains tax of KRW 15,896,50, which is calculated accordingly. Since then, the Plaintiff paid capital gains tax of KRW 200.

11.1.One house for one household, excluding one household among 36 households, as a result of a minor tax investigation.

83,629,600 capital gains tax on the sale of this case on the grounds that it is subject to tax exclusion (payment deadline)

On November 30, 2013, additional notice was given.

D. AA transfers to the Defendant KRW 100,000,000 in accordance with the instant gift agreement.

- 3-

It becomes insolvent in an excessive state.

E. AA includes capital gains tax and additional tax, etc. notified as of the date of the filing of the instant lawsuit as to the foregoing addition.

national taxes of KRW 94,166,880 are delinquent.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's 1 to 10, 12, Eul's 4

the Bank, the Bank of Korea, the Bank of Korea, the Bank of Korea, the Bank of Korea, the Bank of Korea,

As a result of each order to submit financial transaction information to the head, the overall purport of the hearing

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

(a)the existence of preserved claims;

According to the above facts, the Plaintiff’s above taxation claim amounting to KRW 94,166,880,000,000

may be recognized as a preserved claim to be cancelled as a harmful act.

B. Whether the fraudulent act was established

According to the above facts of recognition, AA shall have the defendant 100,000,000 in accordance with the gift contract of this case.

remittance of the source is an act that leads to excess of the obligation, and except in extenuating circumstances.

It would be a fraudulent act in relation to the plaintiff who is the right holder.

As to this, the defendant shall construct the building among the real estate of this case to the construction contractor at the time of constructing the building.

As a means of paying the price, the sum of 360,000,000 won was lent to AA, and the Defendant paid the price to Date.

The remittance of a part of the purchase price from the sale of this case from the net is made for the above loan.

(b) If there is no change in the total property as repayment according to the content of the obligation, this would constitute a fraudulent act.

I argue that it would not be justified.

State that the Defendant transferred to the Building Company only the evidence presented by the Defendant.

It is not sufficient to recognize that the money received is a loan to AA, and otherwise recognize it.

- 4-

Since there is no evidence, the defendant's above assertion is rejected.

C. Defendant’s bona fide defense

The Defendant and AA are deemed to have acted in good faith as to the instant donation contract.

However, as long as the instant donation contract constitutes a fraudulent act, AA and the defendant's death.

AA and the defendant's person who are presumed to be a master and bad faith, and recognized by the evidence mentioned above.

All circumstances, such as the relationship, details of the transaction, the amount remitted to the defendant, the amount remaining after the transfer, active property of AA, etc.

In light of the above, the evidence presented by the defendant alone to reverse the above presumption and the AA or the defendant

It is not sufficient to acknowledge that the fraudulent act is bona fide, and otherwise, evidence to acknowledge it is not sufficient to acknowledge it.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

(d) Revocation of fraudulent damage and restoration to original state;

Therefore, the instant gift contract between AA and the Defendant is revoked as it constitutes a fraudulent act.

of this chapter. The defendant shall restore to the original state following the cancellation, and the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 94,166,880 won and its substitute

5% interest rate per annum as provided in the Civil Code from the day after this judgment becomes final and conclusive to the day of full payment.

have the obligation to pay.

3. Conclusion

Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable, and it is so ordered as per Disposition by admitting it.

shall be ruled.