Seoul Northern District Court-2018-Ban-113826 ( September 20, 2018)

Whether the Defendant’s receipt of the key amount of the instant case from his father constitutes a fraudulent act

The evidence and circumstances alleged by the Plaintiff alone are insufficient to readily conclude that a donation was made between a delinquent taxpayer and the Defendant as alleged by the Plaintiff, or that the Defendant was paid money as an intent to impair creditors, including the Plaintiff, in collusion with the delinquent taxpayer. There is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise.

Article 30 of the National Tax Collection Act

2018Na37473

Korea

AA

Seoul Northern District Court Decision 2018Da113826 Decided September 20, 2018

April 4, 2019

April 25, 2019

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked. The contract of donation concluded on March 9, 2017 between the defendant and BB shall be revoked.

Within the limit of KRW 32,00,000 shall be revoked. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 32,000,000 and this shall apply to the plaintiff.

5% per annum from the day after this judgment becomes final and conclusive to the day of full payment.

H. H. H. H.D.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasoning for this Court’s reasoning is as follows: (a) the Plaintiff’s additional evidence submitted by this Court, which is insufficient to acknowledge the Plaintiff’s assertion, is the same as the reasoning for the judgment of the first instance, except for the rejection of additional statement Nos. 8 and 9, which is not sufficient to acknowledge the Plaintiff’s assertion; and (b) thus,

2. Conclusion

Therefore, the judgment of the first instance court is legitimate, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.