a donation of only real property to the spouse constitutes a fraudulent act.

It constitutes a fraudulent act if the only real estate which is the delinquent taxpayer has been registered for transfer of ownership to his spouse.

2014Gahap67833 Registration of transfer of ownership

Korea

Isa, Park In-A

January 22, 2015

February 5, 2015

1. Defendant LA shall implement the procedure for registration of cancellation of ownership transfer registration completed on February 8, 2012 by the Busan District Court Branch Branch of Incheon District Court with regard to each real estate listed in the separate sheet to Defendant LA.

2. Defendant Park Jong-A shall implement the procedure for the registration of ownership transfer on November 23, 201 with respect to each real estate listed in the separate sheet to Nonparty Kim Kim-A.

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

Cheong-gu Office

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Basic facts

가. 소외 김AA는 2011. 11. 23.경 피고 박AA과 김AA 소유의 ㅇㅇ시 ㅇㅇ읍 ㅇㅇ리 436-7 대 661㎡ 및 지상 건물(이하 'ㅇㅇ리 부동산'이라 한다)과 피고 박AA 소유의 별지 목록 기재 각 부동산(이하 '이 사건 부동산'이라 한다)을 교환하되, 위 대상 부동산의 교환차액으로 피고 박AA이 김AA에게 1억 원을 지급하는 내용의 교환계약(이하 '이 사건 교환계약'이라 한다)을 체결하였다.

나. 2011. 11. 23.자 매매를 각 원인으로 하여, ㅇㅇ리 부동산에 관하여는 의정부지방법원 의정부지방법원고양지원 파주등기소 2011. 12. 20. 접수 제OOO호로 피고 박AA 명의의 소유권이전등기가, 이 사건 부동산에 관하여는 인천지방법원 인천지방법원 부천지원 2012. 2. 8. 접수 제OOO호로 김AA의 처인 피고 이AA 명의의 소유권이전등기(이하 '이 사건 소유권이전등기'라 한다)가 각 마쳐졌다.

다. 한편, 김AA가 이 사건 교환계약에 따라 피고 박AA에게 ㅇㅇ리 부동산을 양도함에 따른 양도소득세를 납부하지 아니하자, 원고는 2012. 4. 9. 김AA에게 위 양도소득세 ㅇㅇ원(이하 '이 사건 양도소득세'라 한다)을 같은 달 30.까지 납부할 것을 고지하였다.

D. As of the date of the closing of argument in this case, KimA is a insolvent in which the aforementioned passive property, such as national taxes in arrears, is unable to pay the national taxes in arrears beyond the active property.

[Reasons for Recognition] Defendant A: The absence of dispute, each entry in Gap evidence 1 to 8, the purport of the whole pleadings

ParkA: Confession (the main sentence of Article 150 (3) of the Civil Procedure Act)

2. Determination

A. Determination as to the claim against Defendant A

1) Whether title trust is held

Since the instant real estate is the real estate acquired by the Defendant A in the sole name of the Defendant A during marriage with the KimA, it is presumed to be the special property of the Defendant A.A (Article 830(1) of the Civil Act).

However, according to the evidence Nos. 7 and 8 of this case's exchange contract of this case, it is reasonable to view that the presumption that the real estate of this case is unique property of this case, and that the presumption that the real estate of this case is identical to property of this case is reversed, and that the KimA concluded the exchange contract of this case with the defendant Park Jong-dong, and that the registration of transfer income tax was made against the defendant Leeyang-dong's office of the senior branch office of the government public prosecutor's office on April 3, 2014, while being aware of the fact that KimA was exempted from the disposition of default, the transfer income tax payer of this case's transfer of ownership in the name of this case and aiding and abetting KimA's act of evading the disposition of default, and that the registration of transfer of ownership of this case is a third party registered trust of this case, in full view of the relationship between the defendant Lee and KimA, and the time when this case's transfer of ownership was completed.

2) The validity of the instant real estate title trust and ownership transfer registration

이 사건 부동산 명의신탁은 김AA가 혼인 중 처인 피고 이AA에게 명의신탁한 것이므로 원칙적으로 부동산 실권리자명의 등기에 관한 법률(이하 '부동산실명법'이라 한다) 제8조 제2호에 따라 유효하다. 그러나 피고 이AA이 김AA와 부부관계에 있어 이 사건 소유권이전등기의 경위에 대하여 알았거나 충분히 알 수 있었을 것으로 보이는 점, 피고 이AA은 김AA가 이 사건 양도소득세를 포탈한다는 사정을 알면서도 이 사건 소유권이전등기를 마쳤다는 혐의에 대하여 기소유예 처분을 받기도 한 점, 피고 이AA이 이 사건 교환계약의 당사자가 아님에도 이 사건 소유권이전등기를 마쳤고, 그 등기 시점도 피고 박AA이 ㅇㅇ리 부동산에 관하여 소유권이전등기를 경료한 때부터 50여 일이 지난 시점인 점등의 사정을 종합하여 보면, 이 사건 소유권이전등기는 이 사건 양도소득세 포탈, 혹은 강제집행의 면탈 등을 위한 목적으로 경료된 것임을 넉넉히 추인할 수 있으므로, 이 사건 부동산 명의신탁 및 소유권이전등기는 부동산실명법 제4조에 따라 무효이다.

3) Sub-decisions

As long as the title trust and ownership transfer registration of the instant real estate are null and void, the said real estate is returned to the Defendant ParkA. As such, Defendant ParkA may seek cancellation of the ownership transfer registration of the instant real estate to Defendant ParkA, a trustee, and as long as the instant exchange contract is still in force between the truster KimA and the seller, the Plaintiff may seek cancellation of the ownership transfer registration of the instant real estate in succession to the Defendant in order to preserve the instant transfer income tax claim by subrogation of KimA and the Defendant ParkA in the order of priority. Accordingly, Defendant Lee Dong is obliged to perform the procedure for cancellation registration of the ownership transfer registration of the instant real estate to Defendant ParkA.

B. Determination as to the claim against Defendant ParkA

As seen earlier, in this case, where the Plaintiff claims by subrogation of KimA to preserve his claim for the transfer income tax of this case as long as the exchange contract of this case is valid, Defendant ParkA is obligated to implement the procedure for the transfer of ownership on November 23, 201 with respect to the real estate of this case to KimA.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim against the defendants is justified, and all of them are accepted, and it is so decided as per Disposition.