Whether it constitutes a fraudulent act

Recognizing that large amount of national taxes will be notified and transferring one's real property to his spouse would be a fraudulent act.

1. The sales contract concluded on December 4, 2006 between the defendant and Park ○○ shall be revoked within the limit of KRW 28,500,000.

2. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 28,50,000 won with 5% interest per annum from the day after the day when the judgment became final to the day of complete payment.

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

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Marking of request: To be as shown in the attached Form;

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

Grounds of Claim

1. The relationship between the non-party Park ○ and the defendant

The wife (public injury divorce) of the non-party in arrears of the national tax (hereinafter referred to as the "non-party in arrears") is Kim ○○. (See the evidence No. 1)

2. Formation of a taxation claim which is a preserved claim;

A. From December 13, 2005 to February 16, 2007, the Nonparty operated the speculative game room in the trade name of ○○○dong 1, ○○○○dong, ○○○○dong, ○○○○○○ Gameland from ○○○○○○. (See, e.g., evidence No. 2-1 and 2)

B. In relation to the operation of the above business, the non-party has paid the value-added tax under consideration by omitting sales at the time of the return of the value-added tax on January 12, 2006. In this regard, the head of the ○○○○ Tax Office under the Plaintiff-based tax office notified 115,279,230 won by the due date on January 12, 2007, but the delinquent national tax has not been paid up to 122,87,650 won including the additional dues (see, e.g., the 'certificate No. 3'

3. Fraudulent act;

A. Even though an entrepreneur is faithfully obligated to pay taxes under tax-related Acts and voluntarily paid the relevant national taxes, the Nonparty is obligated to pay the value-added tax by omitting sales of the value-added tax return on January 2006;

B. He reported that the game room becomes a social issue, and that a large tax investigation on the game room has been initiated in various media (see the evidence No. 4-1 and 2 of the evidence No. 4, referring to the newspaper articles related to the tax investigation on the game room).

C. On November 24, 2006, the director of the tax office of the plaintiffsann selected the above workplace as a person subject to on-the-spot verification and conducted a tax investigation with respect to the report of value-added tax by omitting sales from November 24, 2006 to December 20, 2006 as the investigation period (see the evidence No. 5 of the Act).

D. On December 4, 2006, the Nonparty: (a) on December 4, 2006, registered the ownership transfer of the real estate listed in the separate sheet owned by him (hereinafter referred to as “the instant real estate”) with the knowledge that the amount of national tax would be notified; (b) on the grounds of the sales contract on December 4, 2006, ○○ District Court’s receipt ○○○○○ registry office for receipt of the Nonparty’s spouse, the Nonparty became insolvent; and (c) the Plaintiff was unable to obtain the satisfaction of the tax claim (see, e.g., the transcript of the building registry).

E. In light of the fact that the Nonparty continued to hold the instant real estate since 2002 and there was a press report that it was conducting a large tax investigation on the speculative game business operator, and that the registration of transfer of ownership was made under the presumption that the commencement of tax investigation and the amount of national tax would be notified due to the omission of sale, that the acquisitor is the Nonparty’s wife (the Nonparty’s wife) after the commencement of the tax investigation, that the agreement was made on December 27, 2006 in order to transfer the ownership of the instant real estate after the commencement of the tax investigation, and avoid the Plaintiff’s fraudulent act revocation lawsuit, and that the notified value-added tax was not paid to the present day, the Nonparty’s transfer of ownership of the instant real estate due to the purchase and sale of the instant real estate to the Defendant without paying national tax, and that it is the most act or fraudulent act to avoid compulsory execution, such as seizure due to the disposition of national tax in arrears, etc.

F. The Nonparty appears to have married with the Defendant on December 27, 2006, in preparation for the Nonparty’s transfer of ownership of the instant real estate to the spouse, such as the Plaintiff’s revocation of fraudulent act. If, however, the Nonparty asserts that the divorce was made after the date of fraudulent act, and thus, even if it is a property division, it is excessive beyond a considerable degree of money according to the purport of Article 839-2(2) of the Civil Act, and that the transfer of ownership of the instant real estate, which is one of the valuable real estate that can be appropriated for national tax, to the Defendant, is excessive beyond a considerable amount of money that is not considered by the Plaintiff.

4. Intention and bad faith of the defendant;

The Nonparty had known the Plaintiff at the time of transfer of the instant real estate, which is the only property owned by himself/herself, due to sale and purchase to the Defendant in order to avoid the execution of the disposition of default of national taxes due to the notice of national tax payment, under the status where the liability for tax payment was already established. The Defendant should be deemed to have known the Nonparty’s wife of the fact that the transfer was fraudulent act and the Nonparty’s intent to

5. Whether the pertinent real estate is one-time property

The director of ○○ Tax Office, under the Plaintiff’s control, investigated the property of the Nonparty for the purpose of the disposition on default. The real estate of this case is the only property for the appropriation of the Nonparty’s national taxes (see evidence No. 7 of this case’s current status of property, etc.

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

The plaintiff was issued on January 16, 2007 and became aware of the fraudulent act of this case in order to execute the disposition on default against the non-party that the real estate of this case was registered in the name of the defendant.

7. Value compensation.

A. At the time of the fraudulent act, the mortgage amount of KRW 72,00,000 was set at the time of the fraudulent act with respect to the instant real estate, and as shown in the evidence No. 8, the credit amount of 00,000,000 with respect to the said mortgage against the Nonparty was set at the time of the third party’s fraudulent act.

B. The current market price of the real estate of this case is 8,50,000 won (see, e.g., evidence A 9 of multi-family housing). Therefore, the Plaintiff is entitled to seek compensation for the value of the claim in order to recover an amount equivalent to KRW 122,887,650 of the Plaintiff’s claim amount within the limit of KRW 28,50,000, which is the balance obtained by deducting the obligation (60,000,000) secured at the time of the fraudulent act from the present price of the real estate of this case from the current price of the real estate of this case.

8. Conclusion

The Nonparty’s act of completing the registration of ownership transfer to the Defendant on the instant real estate on the grounds of sale is deemed to constitute a fraudulent act, which is an act of knowing that it would prejudice the Plaintiff, a creditor, in order to evade the Nonparty’s tax liability.

In accordance with Article 406 of the Civil Code and Article 30 of the National Tax Collection Act, the plaintiff has claimed compensation for the restitution of the amount of claim, such as the purport of the claim.

Title C. (Real Estate in this case)

(Indication of one building)

○○ Metropolitan City ○○○○-dong 4 ○○ apartment ○○ ○○-dong

Multi-family housing of 13 floors of reinforced concrete sloping roof

1-2 1083.93 square meters of 1071.93 square meters of 3 1071.93 square meters of 1071.93 square meters of 4 1071.93 square meters of 1071

5 1071.93 square meters 6 1071.93 square meters 1071.93 square meters 7 1071.93 square meters 8 879.00 square meters ;

9 879.00 square meters for 10 square meters for 879.00 square meters for 11 square meters for 686.07 square meters for 12 stories for 686.07 square meters for 12 stories

13 square meters underground 985.80 square meters of 686.07 square meters of 13 stories

(Indication of Land Subject to Site Right)

1. ○○ Metropolitan City ○○○-dong 4 10145 square meters high from ○○ 10145 square meters;

(Indication of Section of Exclusive Ownership)

402 Floors No. 402 reinforced concrete tanks 84.45С

(Indication of Site Right)

1. Ownership: 4346/100 of the ownership and site rights;