Registration of Cancellation of Ownership

The Defendant is obligated to return the purchase fund from title trust to the Plaintiff, a creditor against the defaulted taxpayer as unjust enrichment.

Article 404 of the Civil Act

Daejeon District Court 2015Kadan20912

Korea

The Doei Village Association

February 18, 2016

February 25, 2016

1. Basic facts

A. The director of the tax office of the Plaintiff-affiliated BB shall pay the due date to AA on January 6, 2014.

The capital gains tax was determined and announced to KRW 128,849,958, but AA had been so decided until now.

did not pay the acquisition tax.

B. AA on October 28, 2002, the Daejeon District Court BB branch office 2002 Magi874, 2002 Magi7592 (Duals)

The fact at the date of sale of the real estate auction case is the fact that the real estate is subject to sale, is the Dogdog, the Dogri-si, the

P 98,565/379,339 shares among forest land 65-12 379,339 square meters (hereinafter referred to as "real estate in this case"), 98,565/379,339 shares

The name at the time of the defendant, whose representative is the real estate purchased by AA, shall be “BB City 2.

면 도곡리 동계(洞契)'였다 � 명의로 공유자 우선매수 신고를 하여 낙찰을 받고, 2002.

12. 31. Payment of the proceeds of sale of KRW 124,000,000 on January 2, 2003 at the request of the above court

98,565/379,339 shares of real estate shall be awarded in the name of the defendant for a voluntary auction under the name of the defendant.

One person has completed the registration of ownership transfer.

(c) AA shall hold a deposit account amounting to approximately KRW 380,000 in total against current post offices, new banks, and Nonghyup Bank;

There is no particular positive property other than the right.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Gap evidence 3-1 to 3, and Gap evidence 4

re-, the IBK Bank Business Assistance Division, the Director of the Bank Receiving Service Center, and the Postal Service Information Center of this Court

The Secretary, the Director, the Director of the Support Center for the Business of the New Bank, the Director of the Support Center for the Han Bank, and the Director of IT Planning for the NH Bank.

As a result of each order to submit financial transaction information, the purport of all pleadings.

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of recognition, AA entered into a so-called contract title trust agreement with the defendant, and name.

98,565/379,339 shares of the real estate in this case in the above auction case by the defendant who is the trustee

The registration of ownership transfer under the name of the defendant shall be completed by the title trustee as a party to the title trust.

The owner who was unaware of the fact that the agreement was made and entered into a sale contract for real estate and

Cases where the registration of ownership transfer of the relevant real estate is completed in the name of the trustee under the sales contract.

As can be seen, even though the above contract title trust agreement is null and void, the defendant who is the title trustee is the defendant.

Of the real estate of this case, the full ownership of 98,565/379,339 shares shall be acquired, provided that the defendant has obtained the full ownership

AA is merely liable to return unjust enrichment to AA. However, the above contract title trust agreement

은 ��부동산 실권리자명의 등기에 관한 법률��시행 후인 2002. 10. 28.경 체결되어 명의

AAA, a trustee, has acquired ownership of 98,565/379,339 shares of the real property of this case from the beginning of the beginning.

As such, the damages incurred by AA due to the invalidity of the above contract title trust agreement shall not be subject to this effect.

Purchase provided to the defendant who is the title trustee, not the share itself of 98,565/379,339 among real estate

Therefore, the defendant made unjust enrichment from the purchase fund received from AA.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2002Da66922 Decided January 28, 2005).

B. However, according to the above facts, the plaintiff at least 128,849,958 won for AA.

AAA is insolvent, and the defendant has the above taxation claim, as the AA is currently insolvent.

AA’s subrogation of the right to claim restitution of unjust enrichment by AA with the preserved claim

The purchase fund of KRW 124,000,000 and the plaintiff on October 21, 2015

In addition, from October 23, 2015 to October 23, 2015, the day following the delivery of a copy of the application for change of the cause of the claim.

shall pay damages for delay at the rate of 15% per annum under the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings

[On the other hand, the defendant does not have a clear argument or evidence until the date of the closing of the argument in this case.

On February 23, 2016, after the conclusion of the theory, the defendant applied for the resumption of argument and "the real estate of this case around January 2004"

On April 2, 2007 following the division of 100,166 square meters into the Dolsan Dolsan 65-61 of the Dolsan Dolsan Dol-si of the mountain-do.

Since the ownership of land was transferred to AA, the claim for return of unjust enrichment was extinguished.

AA and the Defendant, a trustee, are the trustee, under the direction of AA.

even if the title trust agreement was made to transfer the title of the real estate held in title trust to AA, this agreement

under the premise that the title trust agreement is valid, in the category of seeking the return of the title trust real estate itself

Inasmuch as it is also null and void (Supreme Court Decision 2011Da89903 Decided September 12, 2013, Supreme Court Decision 2011Da8903 Decided September 12,

Court Decision 2006Da35117 decided Nov. 9, 2006 (see Supreme Court Decision 2006Da35117, Nov. 9, 2006).

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition.