In civil proceedings, the validity of taxation disposition cannot be denied.

Since a delinquent taxpayer donated each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet to the Defendants in excess of his/her obligation, each donation contract constitutes a fraudulent act detrimental to the general creditors including the Plaintiff, and the validity of the taxation disposition cannot be denied in the civil procedure.

Article 30 of the National Tax Collection Act

2012 Ghana 203425 Revocation of Fraudulent Act

Korea

Lee Dong-A et al.

June 13, 2012

June 29, 2012

1. The contract on the gift of January 24, 201 with respect to the real estate listed in the separate sheet 1 between Defendant AA and the lowestB, and the contract on the gift of October 5, 201 with respect to the real estate listed in the separate sheet 2 between Defendant UCC and the lowestB, shall be revoked, respectively.

2. The real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1 shall be registered to the largestB, and the defendant A shall carry out the procedure for cancellation registration of each transfer of ownership completed under the Changwon District Court, the High Court, the High Court, and the High Court, and the High Court, and the High Court, as to the real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 2, the registration of cancellation of each transfer of ownership completed on October 10, 201 by the recipient No. 16962.

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

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Basic facts

Defendant AAA’s mother is the largest BB, and Defendant AA’s most spouse was not reported, and the amount of penalty for cancellation related to the business for attribution in 2009 was not reported to 000 won, the case was treated as representative recognition, and the case was notified of changes in the amount of income on November 30, 2010 to the largest BB who is the representative director, and the comprehensive income tax was notified of KRW 00,000, but the most BB did not pay it, and the case was in excess of the liabilities due to the absence of other assets than each real estate listed in the separate sheet, and the fact that the largest BB was unable to file the registration of transfer with Defendant B on January 24, 2011 by Busan District Court 5831, which was received on February 1, 201, and that the registration of transfer was entered on the list No. 1601 through 16, 2010, and each of the parties was entered on the list No. 16.201,5.

2. Determination

위 인정사실에 의하면 최BB은 채무초과 상태에서 별지 목록 기재 각 부동산을 피고들에게 증여하였으므로 각 증여계약은 원고를 비롯한 일반채권자들을 해하는 사해행위에 해당한다 할 것이고， 수익자인 피고들의 악의는 추정된다. 이에 대하여 피고들은， 주식회사 DD토건의 실제 사주는 임정모이고， 최BB은 임QQ가 운영하는 창조토건의 직원으로 임정모의 부탁으로 주식회사 DD토건의 대표이사가 된 것이므로 최BB에 대한 과세처분은 부당하다고 주장한다. 그러나 과세처분이 당연무효라고 볼 수 없는 한 과세처분에 취소할 수 있는 위법사유가 있다 하더라도 그 과세처분이 적법하게 취소되기 전까지는 유효하다고 볼 것이어서 민사소송절차에서 과세처분의 효력을 부인할 수는 없는바， 피고들이 주장하는 사정만으로는 이 사건 과세처분이 당연무효라고 할 수 없고， 달리 이를 인정할 증거가 없으므로 피고틀의 주장은 이유 없다. 따라서 이 사건 각 증여계약은 사해행위이므로 취소되어야 하고， 피고들은 원상회복 의무의 이행으로서 별지 목록 기재 각 부동산에 관한 각 소유권이전등기의 말소등기절차를 이행할 의무가 있다.

3. Conclusion

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