Revocation, etc. of Fraudulent Act

The act of a delinquent taxpayer's transfer of real estate to his wife constitutes a fraudulent act.

Article 30 of the National Tax Collection Act Revocation of Fraudulent Act

1. Indication of claims: as shown in the reasons for the claims in attached Form.

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

Cheongwon of the Gu

1. The relationship between Nonparty ○○ and the Defendant

From December 5, 2002, the non-party ○○○ (hereinafter referred to as the "non-party ○○") who is the delinquent taxpayer, runs the construction subcontract business under the trade name of ○○○○-dong ○○○○○○○○○○○○○, a national tax, and closes down on June 12, 2006, and the defendant is the wife of the non-party ○○○○.

(A) Evidence No. 9 1 to 2 of the family register

2. Formation of tax claims;

A. The Nonparty: (a) filed a revised return on September 30, 2005; and (b) did not pay KRW 11,754,190,00 for the total global income tax for 205; (c) did not pay KRW 11,776,860 for the total global income tax for 205; (d) did not pay KRW 11,776,860 for the total global income tax for 205; (e) was determined as data on the tax base of value added tax for 2004; and (e) did not pay KRW 30,072,00 for the total amount of value added tax for 204 and KRW 30,304 for 204 for the total amount of value added tax for 30,000 for 20,000 for the total amount of tax return; and (e) did not pay the global income tax for 205 years for the total amount of tax credit for 205 years for the total amount of tax return.

B. Accordingly, the head of ○○○○ Tax Office under the Plaintiff’s control of the Plaintiff notified 1,754,190 won of the value-added tax for the first period of November 10, 2005 as the due date for payment on November 30, 2005, which was 1,070,830 won as of November 10, 2005. The global income tax amount for 2005 was 1,776,860 won as the due date for payment on November 30, 2005 and appropriated 11,776,860 won as of 30,000 won as of November 30, 2005, but was 10,000,000 won as of 20,000 won as of 30,000 won as of 40,000 won as of 20,000 won as of December 31, 2005.

In addition, the fact that the head of ○○ Tax Office having jurisdiction over the current domicile of the non-party was unpaid after the filing of the global income tax return for the year 2005 is confirmed, and the non-party did not pay the tax amount of KRW 18,807,260 by the due date for payment on August 31, 2006.

(A) No. 1-11-value added tax correction resolution, 'the global income tax assessment resolution', 'the notice of occurrence of tax data and 'the explanation of explanation', etc.

C. Therefore, the non-party is delinquent due to the non-party's failure to pay 82,329,850 won for national taxes, such as value-added tax, until now.

3. Fraudulent act;

A. The Nonparty applied for the deferment of collection of global income tax (the date of the establishment of the tax liability: June 30, 2005) for the interim prepayment of global income tax for 2005 years prior to the payment period on November 30, 2005, and was deferred until December 31, 2005. The Nonparty received the registration of transfer of ownership as of October 18, 2005 on the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter referred to as the “real estate”) which was owned by ○○○ District Court for the purpose of avoiding the attachment of property due to the disposition on default, with the knowledge that there is a high probability that national tax will be levied in the nearest from the gold-free book, and the notice and explanation of the occurrence of taxation data and the notification of explanation regarding the illegal disposal of the input tax amount for the first and second years on October 2005 was notified in October 2005.

(c)

(A) 1 'Certified copy of the evidence 3-1'

B. The acquirer of the instant real estate is the Nonparty’s wife, and the Defendant was living on the first floor of ○○○○○○-dong ○○○○○○○○○○○-dong ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○, which was located on the first floor of ○○○○○○-dong ○○○○○○○○○○○○, and the first floor of the instant real estate was 63 years old, but at the time of acquiring the instant real estate, the mortgage was not established at all due to the loan of the financial institution. The instant real estate was known of the change in ownership by March 29, 206, which was the date of termination of the instant real estate, from ○○ Development, which was the date of termination of the right to collateral security. The Nonparty, currently at ○○○○○○○○○, ○○○○○, ○○○, ○○○○○○, and did not have any income in arrears.

(A) Evidence 3-2, 3-2, 3-2, 4-2, 3-2, 3-2, 3-2, and 4

4. Whether the pertinent real estate was the primary property

The head of ○○ Tax Office, under the Plaintiff’s control, investigated the property of the Nonparty for the purpose of the disposition on default, and in the event of fraudulent act of the instant real estate, such as the evidence No. 2 of the attached documents, data on the property of the Nonparty, it was the only possible to appropriate the instant real estate for national taxes

5. The intention of an injury.

The non-party, who knows that it is highly probable that national taxes will be notified in the near future, registered the transfer of ownership to the defendant of this case, the only property owned by him, which is the only property owned by him, at the time of sale, would have known that the plaintiff would be able to obtain satisfaction of the tax claim.

6. Bad faith of the defendant

The defendant is the wife of the non-party, and the non-party knew that there was no other property to be appropriated for national taxes except for the real estate in this case, and the defendant also should be deemed to have known the fact that this sale was fraudulent at the time of acquiring the real estate in this case, and that the non-party's intention of deception was known.

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

The plaintiff was issued a certified copy of the register of the real estate of this case on August 1, 2006 to verify the details of the transfer of the non-party's real estate to execute the disposition on default against the non-party.

8. Conclusion

In light of the above facts, the sales contract for the instant real estate between the Nonparty and the Defendant was concluded with the knowledge that the Nonparty would be exempted from any disposition on default of national taxes, such as high-value added tax, which would be imposed in the near future, and the Defendant also constitutes a fraudulent act with the knowledge of the fact.

In accordance with Article 406 of the Civil Code and Article 30 of the National Tax Collection Act, the plaintiff has cancelled the sales contract for the real estate of this case as stated in the purport of the claim and caused the claim to seek the cancellation of the registration of transfer of ownership due to restitution.