Revocation of Fraudulent Act

donation to his sole property in excess of his obligation constitutes a fraudulent act

Article 406 of the Civil Act

Gwangju District Court Decision 2015Kadan73818 Revocation of Fraudulent Act

Korea

Ma-○

Pleadings without Oral Proceedings

September 9, 2015

1. As to each real estate listed in the separate sheet:

A. Revocation of each gift contract concluded on May 21, 2014 between the Defendant and the ○○○○, and

B. The Defendant’s receipt on May 23, 2014 to the ○○○-si Branch of Gwangju District Court Gwangju District Court’s Ycheon Branch Office

The procedure for the cancellation registration of each transfer of ownership completed by 12754 shall be implemented.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

Cheong-gu Office

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Indication of claim;

The reasons for the attached Form shall be as shown in the attached Form.

2. Judgment without holding any pleadings;

Articles 208(3)1 and 257 of the Civil Procedure Act

Judge Lee Bo-chul

Grounds of Claim

1. As to the non-party ○’s default and the Plaintiff’s establishment of a preserved claim (tax claim)

(a) Details of imposition of the national taxes and details of arrears;

The head of ○○○ Tax Office under the Plaintiff sent out to Nonparty ○○○ (hereinafter referred to as “taxpayer in arrears”) a notice of explanation of taxation data on the disguised purchase data belonging to the period of January 2010, 201, January 201, and January 2, 2012, and January 28, 2012, but returned it to the address of the delinquent taxpayer, on April 07, 2014, the person in charge of the tax office sent a text of explanation by facsimile after call with the delinquent taxpayer, and the delinquent taxpayer sent it to Nonparty ○○ (hereinafter referred to as “the delinquent taxpayer in arrears”) after receiving the text of explanation. However, the head of ○○ Tax Office sent the notice of explanation to the delinquent taxpayer on July 31, 2014 without sending the notice of explanation to the delinquent taxpayer on the date of payment of value-added tax.

As of the date of the filing of the suit, the national taxes of KRW 40,250,720 for the total of six cases are in arrears as follows (see Evidence A No. 1 and Evidence A No. 2-1 to 6).

Details of preserved claims as of the date of the institution of the action.

(unit: source)

Sub-Items :

E =

Liability for Tax Payment

Date of establishment

Notice Amount

Current arrears

Deadline for payment

Value-added Tax

2010 1

2010.06.30

6,927,050

7,966,060

2014.07.31

Value-added Tax

20102

December 31, 2010

8,699,760

10,004,650

2014.07.31

Value-added Tax

2011.1

2011.06.30

3,872,270

4,453,030

2014.07.31

Value-added Tax

2011.2

December 31, 201

6,872,530

7,903,400

2014.07.31

Value-added Tax

2012.1

2012.06.30

5,099,080

5,863,850

2014.07.31

Value-added Tax

2012.2

December 31, 2012

3,530,230

4,059,730

2014.07.31

Total

35,000,920

40,250,720

(b) Basic date for establishing tax claims;

Tax claims are legally established when the taxation requirements prescribed by tax law are satisfied. Since the establishment of the value-added tax liability is established when the taxable period expires pursuant to Article 21(1)1 of the Framework Act on National Taxes, the Plaintiff’s tax claim against the delinquent taxpayer has already been established prior to the date of the instant fraudulent act (O. 21, 2014). Accordingly, there is no defect that the delinquent taxpayer’s default tax amount becomes the Plaintiff’s preserved claim.

2. Fraudulent act;

The delinquent taxpayer avoided contact with the person in charge of the ○○ Tax Office without any explanation from the director of the ○○ Tax Office on the disguised purchase data after receipt of the explanatory guide, and prior to the notification of the value-added tax, the delinquent taxpayer entered into a donation contract with the defendant on the entire shares of the delinquent taxpayer (hereinafter referred to as “the real estate of this case”) in the amount of "Yari-do No. 926, No. 1338, No. 1407, No. 1001-1, No. 124, No. 135-2, No. 13554, May 23, 2014, which is the property of the delinquent taxpayer in his/her own name, prior to the notification of the value-added tax."

3. The doctor of the private will;

On 04.07. 04. 07. 04. 07, it is apparent that the head of ○○ Tax Office received the explanation of taxation data on the disguised purchase of value-added tax, and it could have sufficiently predicted that the value-added tax on the disguised purchase data will be imposed. In fact, the head of ○○ Tax Office notified the delinquent taxpayer of the value-added tax of KRW 6 cases, total amount of KRW 35,000,920 on the payment period on July 05, 2014.

It is clear that the delinquent taxpayer's will to cancel his/her liability property by donating the real estate in this case to the defendant on May 21, 2014 after receipt of the explanation of taxation data regarding disguised purchase of value-added tax.

4. Bad faith of the defendant

The defendant should be deemed to have known the fact that the act of donation was a fraudulent act at the time of receiving the real estate of this case, and the intention of the delinquent taxpayer's will.

(See Evidence No. 4 1 to 2)

5. As to the delinquent taxpayer's debts in excess

On October 21, 2014, the delinquent taxpayer donated the instant real estate to the Defendant. At the time, to examine the excess debts, I asked the property as shown in attached Table 1 through the integrated inquiry conference of financial property and the National Tax Service’s computer network. The delinquent taxpayer was the gift of the instant real estate, resulting in the delinquent’s excess of the debt amounting to KRW 8,615,93, 45,000,920.

(See Evidence No. 5 1 to 4)

Table 1

No.

Property held in case of fraudulent act

Excess of Debt

aggressive

Value

(Public Notice Price)

passive

Value

(Financial Obligations +

The amount in arrears, etc.

Jinay

Total

△△△6,384,927

8,615,993

45,000,920

1

○○ Doo Doz.

5,015,822

2

Han Bank

3,600,000

3

Han Bank

171

4

Han Bank

10,000,000

5

Tax Claims (National Taxes)

35,000,920

6. On the day when he became aware of the cause of revocation of the fraudulent act

After the default of value-added tax on 01.08.08.01, the plaintiff was aware of the fraudulent act committed between the delinquent taxpayer and the defendant in the course of perusal of the certified copy of the register of the real estate of this case on 2014.09.22.

7. Conclusion

As above, the contract of donation on the real estate of this case between the delinquent taxpayer and the defendant was concluded with the knowledge that it would prejudice the plaintiff, who is a tax payer, to be exempted from the disposition of default on national taxes imposed by the head of ○○ Tax Office, and the defendant is obligated to implement the procedure for registration of cancellation of ownership transfer registration under the name of the defendant, which has been completed for the real estate of this case, as the restoration to its original state. Thus, the defendant has the obligation to seek cancellation of the objection pursuant to Article 30 of