Act of transfer of only real property in excess of liabilities constitutes a fraudulent act.

The debtor's act of transferring his/her only real estate to a specified creditor as payment in kind constitutes a fraudulent act unless there are special circumstances, and the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

The contents of the decision shall be the same as attached.

Article 30 of the National Tax Collection Act / [Fraud]

1. Revocation of a contract of gift made on October 20, 206 between Defendant Lee Dong-gu on real estate listed in the separate sheet

2. The defendant will implement the procedure for cancellation registration of ownership transfer registration completed on October 20, 2006 under the receipt No. 96802 with respect to the real estate stated in the separate sheet to ○○-gu.

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

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Basic facts

다음 가가 사실은 당사자 사이에ㅐ 다툼이 없거나, 갑 제1 내지 4호증의 각 기재에 변론의 전취지를 종합하면 인정할 수 있다.

A. A. Around November 2006, the Plaintiff issued a tax payment notice of KRW 69,039,950 on the part of this ○○-dong 988-○○○○○○○ 202, a trade name, “○○○ ○○ ○○ ○○ ○○ ○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ 202, Jan. 1, 2006, which was a value-added tax (from January 1, 2006 to June 30, 2006) on the part

B. On October 20, 2006, the ○○-gu concluded a donation contract with the Defendant on real estate indicated in the separate sheet, the sole real estate of which the Defendant is the wife (hereinafter “instant donation contract”), and completed the registration of ownership transfer to the Defendant on the same day.

C. The above value-added tax is much more than the value-added tax on the property of this ○○○○○○○○○○○, as well as the above real estate, since the right to lease deposit against the above 202 ○○○○, supra, was equivalent to KRW 60 million.

2. Determination

A. Judgment on the ground of the plaintiff's claim

In a case where, at the time of speculative acts, there is a high probability that there exists a legal relationship which already serves as the basis of the establishment of a claim, and that a claim is to be established in the near future, and where a claim has been created by realizing the possibility in the near future, such claim may also be the subject-matter of the obligee’s right of revocation. In this case, the Plaintiff’s claim in this case is prior to the donation contract in this case and the time when the claim is reverted is the time when the duty payment notice is served, and

In addition, the duty payment notice is made in excess of the debt, and the tax claim has been established in reality, so the creditor's right of revocation becomes the preserved claim.

In addition, the excess of the obligation constitutes a fraudulent act unless there are special circumstances, barring any special circumstances, the act of this ○○○ and the Defendant’s donation of real estate to the Defendant, which is the only wife, constitutes a fraudulent act. In light of the relationship between this ○○ and the Defendant, the circumstances surrounding the establishment of the value-added tax and gift contract

Therefore, the gift contract of this case should be cancelled as a fraudulent act, and the registration of ownership transfer should also be cancelled as a restoration.

B. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

As to this, the defendant alleged that the Lee○-gu borrowed 200 million won from the wife while running the business and transferred the real estate listed in the separate sheet to the defendant for payment in kind, and thus, it does not constitute a fraudulent act. However, the defendant's assertion is without merit since the debtor's transfer of the only real estate to a specific creditor as payment in kind constitutes a fraudulent act, unless there are special circumstances.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case shall be accepted on the grounds of its reasoning, and it is so decided as per Disposition.