The act of transferring the only real estate while the tax was predicted to be notified is a fraudulent act.

The transfer of only the real estate owned by the defaulted taxpayer to all of the defaulted taxpayer without paying the transfer income tax after filing a report constitutes a fraudulent act.

Article 30 of the National Tax Collection Act Revocation of Fraudulent Act

2014 Ghana 10542 Revocation of Fraudulent Act

Korea

NewA

Pleadings without Oral Proceedings

July 23, 2014

1. The sales contract concluded on April 28, 2013 between the Defendant and ParkB (O-OOOO) is revoked.

2. The Defendant shall comply with the procedure for registration of cancellation of ownership transfer registration completed under No. 15130 on May 28, 2013 by Changwon District Court, Changwon District Court, Changwon District Court and Changwon District Court with respect to the real estate stated in the attached list to ParkB (OO-OOOOOOOOO)

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

Cheong-gu Office

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Indication of claims: It shall be as shown in attached Form; and

2. Judgment without holding any pleadings (Articles 208 (3) 1 and 257 of the Civil Procedure Act);

Cheongwon of the Gu

1. Relationship between the defendant and the non-party ParkB

“The Defendant has the honor of Nonparty 1 B, who was in default of national taxes (hereinafter referred to as “Nonindicted 1”) and a copy of the evidence No. 1.

A’s Certificate No. 1-2 Family Relationship Certificate 2, 2. Details of establishment of a taxation claim, which is a preserved bond

A. On May 30, 2012, the head of the headquarters under the Plaintiff-affiliated tax office transferred OO 843-1, OO 843-13, OO 843-13, and OO 843-13, and did not pay the capital gains tax after filing a return on April 17, 2013. Thus, on July 2, 2013, the Nonparty notified OOO OO as the due date for payment on July 31, 2013.

“A 1 Transfer Income Tax Determination Resolution of Evidence No. 2 A

The evidence No. 2-2 of the evidence No. 2-2, referring to the "Tax Investigation Report", and the tax liability that the person other than the lawsuit did not pay the above national tax and currently is delinquent shall be as follows: (See the evidence No. 2-2, hereinafter referred to as the "written investigation in the absence of arrears") and the details of the preserved claim (the amount in arrears) (as of May 2014) (as of May 2014).

(unit: source)

Sub-Items :

E =

Date of establishment of tax liability

Deadline for payment

Notice Tax Amount

Amount in arrears

(including additional charges)

Transfer Income Tax

2012

May 31, 2012

July 31, 2013

OOO

OOO

Consolidateds

OOO

OOO

B. Although it is required that a claim protected by the obligee’s right of revocation was, in principle, incurred prior to the commission of an act that can be deemed a fraudulent act. However, there is a high probability that at the time of the fraudulent act, there exists a legal relationship that has already been based on which the claim was established, and that a claim should be established based on the nearest legal relationship. In fact, where a claim has been established by realizing the probability in the near future, the claim may also become a preserved claim. The legal relationship that forms the basis for the establishment of a claim is not limited to the legal relationship under an agreement between the parties, but shall be deemed to include a quasi-legal relationship or fact-finding that is probable to establish a claim (see Supreme Court Decision 2002Da42957, Nov. 8, 2002).

C. As stated in the purport of the claim, the fraudulent act committed on April 28, 2013 by the non-party who purchased and sold the real estate listed in the attached list (hereinafter referred to as the "real estate of this case") to the defendant, but at the time of the fraudulent act, there was a high probability of realizing the basic legal relations of the claim against the non-party in the amount of national tax in arrears (on May 31, 2012), and since the notification of national tax to the non-party by the Kim Sea Tax Office as stated in the above Supreme Court precedents, it is highly probable that the claim against the non-party in the amount of national tax in arrears against the non-party becomes a preserved claim that can be protected as the right to revoke the fraudulent act in light of the above Supreme Court precedents."

“A. Although the Nonparty voluntarily reported and paid national taxes in good faith in accordance with relevant laws, such as the Income Tax Act, he did not voluntarily pay the capital gains tax on April 17, 2013, and even if he predicted that a large amount of national taxes will be notified in the near future, the Nonparty completed the registration of ownership transfer on April 28, 2013 as to the real estate stated in the separate sheet, which is the only property owned by himself, for sale and purchase on April 28, 2013, with the Changwon District Court, Changwon District Court, Changwon Branch Branch Branch Branch, etc. For this reason, the Nonparty becomes insolvent, and the Plaintiff was unable to obtain satisfaction of the tax claim. (A) The Defendant purchased the real estate in this case is the Nonparty’s share of the non-party, and the non-party’s subsequent payment of national taxes is deemed to have not been made, and thus, the Nonparty’s sales of the real estate in this case to the Defendant constitutes evasion of the Plaintiff’s fraudulent act due to a disposition of national taxes in arrears.

4. Whether the property of the instant real estate is in excess of obligations (whether it exceeds obligations)

"The real estate of this case was the only one available for the appropriation of national taxes as shown in the summary of each place of tax payment (refer to the evidence A)" (refer to the evidence No. 4), 5. Private will and the defendant's bad faith.

The Nonparty, at the time of the fraudulent act, anticipated that the liability to pay national taxes against the Nonparty was established and that national taxes would be notified in the near future, should have known the Plaintiff at the time of transfer of ownership due to the sale and purchase of the instant real estate, which is the only property owned by himself, to the Defendant. The Defendant should be deemed to have known the Nonparty’s sales and purchase as a sales slip of the Nonparty and the Nonparty’s intention to commit the fraudulent act.

6. The date on which he becomes aware of a fraudulent act;

In the course of the investigation of property in order to track hidden property of the OO of the OO of the regional tax office affiliated with the Plaintiff and to execute the disposition on default against the Nonparty, on March 31, 2014, the real estate in this case was issued with a full certificate and a complete copy of the registered matters of this case, and it was known that the ownership transfer registration has been made in the name of the Defendant and the fraudulent act of the Nonparty.

7. Conclusion

In light of the above facts, the act of the Nonparty’s act of completing the registration of ownership transfer to the Defendant on the instant real estate on the grounds of sale constitutes a fraudulent act, which is an act of knowing that it would prejudice the Plaintiff, the creditor, in order to evade the Nonparty’s tax liability. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s claim, such as the purport of the claim, pursuant to Article 406 of the Civil Act and Article 30 of the National Tax Collection Act, led to the Nonparty’s claim,