Since the defaulted taxpayer made the gift of this case in excess of his liability, it constitutes a fraudulent act.

As at the time of donation of this case, since the delinquent taxpayer was in excess of his obligation, the donation of this case constitutes a fraudulent act, and the defendant is the spouse of the delinquent taxpayer, and thus his intention of death is recognized, the contract of this case is revoked, and the defendant is obliged to

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

2015 Gohap207552 Revocation of Fraudulent Act

Korea

Park AA

Pleadings without Oral Proceedings

March 23, 2016

1. The contract of donation concluded on April 8, 2015 between the defendant and the non-party rightB regarding each real estate listed in the separate sheet shall be revoked.

2. The Defendant will implement each procedure for the cancellation of registration of each transfer of ownership completed on April 10, 2015 under the receipt of No. 17739 with regard to each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet to Nonparty B.

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

Cheong-gu Office

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Status between parties;

The plaintiff has a claim of KRW 7,390,582,420 on the non-party B's right to the non-party B (hereinafter referred to as "rightB"), and the defendant is the spouse of the rightB (No. 1, No. 2).

2. Establishment of taxable circumstances and preserved claims;

(a) Details of taxation;

The director of the listed tax office under the Plaintiff notified the transfer income tax of KRW 9,18,598,922 on November 27, 2006 to the case that the rightB is jointly and severally liable for tax payment of KRW 1,000,000,000,000 and KRW 7,000,000,000,000,000,0000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000.

1. The amount of national taxes in arrears as of the date of filing the lawsuit by the 1. TitleB

(unit: won)

Jurisdiction Form

Items of Taxation

Deadline for payment

Amount in arrears

Time of Reversion

Date of establishment of tax liability;

O

Transfer Income Tax

2015.06.30

711,729,770

206

November 30, 2006

O

Transfer Income Tax

oly 14, 2014

6,678,852,650

206

206.07.31

Total delinquent amount

7,390,582,420

B. Establishment of preserved claims

As to the preserved claim of the obligee's right of revocation, the Supreme Court of Korea requires that in principle, a claim protected by the obligee's right of revocation was created prior to the occurrence of an act that can be viewed as a fraudulent act, but it is highly probable that the legal relationship, which serves as the basis of the establishment of the claim, has already occurred at the time of the fraudulent act, and that the claim should be established in the near future because it has been realized in the near future, the claim may also become a preserved claim, and the legal relationship, which forms the basis of the establishment of the claim, shall not be limited to the legal relationship under an agreement between the parties, but shall be deemed to include the quasi-legal relationship, fact-finding, etc. with the probability of the establishment of the claim (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2002Da42957, Nov. 8, 2002).

The transfer income tax is a tax to be paid by preliminary return, and the liability for payment is established on the last day of the month (the month to which the date of the transfer of assets belongs) in which the amount constituting the tax base under Article 21(2)2 of the Framework Act on National Taxes occurs. As such, the date on which the liability for payment of the preservation claim is established is the last day of the month to which each real estate is transferred.

Although there was no partial (the notice of the due date in June 2015) of the Plaintiff’s claim against the Plaintiff’s rightB at the time of the instant donation contract, there was a high probability that the rightB transferred real estate to July 13, 2006 and the legal relationship, which forms the basis for the occurrence of the claim that can be protected by the obligee’s right of revocation, was established by transferring the assigned real estate, and that the Plaintiff’s claim against the Plaintiff’s rightB was established in the near future. In fact, the probability was realized by notifying the Plaintiff of the transfer income tax in June 2015 and the claim was established by the Plaintiff’s notification of the transfer income tax, and thus, the instant tax claim becomes a preserved claim of the obligee’s right of revocation.

3. Fraudulent act;

(a) Real estate donation contract;

The rightB donated each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter referred to as “each real estate of this case”) on October 2015, 2015 to the defendant who is the spouse and completed the registration of ownership transfer of real estate under the condition that he/she has not performed his/her obligation to pay the capital gains tax amount notified. (No. 3)

B. Positive and negative property at the time of the fraudulent act

The rightB held active and passive property as shown in Table 2 as at the date of fraudulent act ( October 2015. 0. 0. 2015. ). (No. 3-1-2, A-4, A-5-1-2, A-6, A-7, A-1-1-1-14, 8-9, and 10)

Table 2. Potable property and small property at the time of the fraudulent act

(unit: Won)

U.S.C.

so far as the Republic of Korea

internal stations

Values

Method of Assessment

internal stations

Values

Method of Assessment

Total

1,251,953,663

Total

7,860,582,420

Each real estate of this case

923,000,000

Individual housing

Price

Tax Liabilities

7,390,582,420

Tax Liabilities

OOOO-gu OOO-Eup 147

273,750,000

August 11, 2015

Sales Price

Rental deposit

250,000,000

Contract

OOOO-dong OO-dong 12-517

7,705,930

Individual Land Price

Rental deposit

20,000,000

Contract

Bank of Korea

0000000000030

39,006,000

Balance of Deposits

Bank of Korea

000000000046

8,491,733

Trust assets:

OOOOOO operation

Busan 12-516

-

Trust assets:

OOOOOO operation

Busan 12-518

-

Trust assets:

OOOOOO operation

Busan 12-520

-

Trust assets:

OOOOOO operation

Busan 12-521

-

Trust assets:

OOOOOO operation

Busan 12-522

-

Trust assets:

OOOOOO operation

Busan 12-558

-

Trust assets:

OOOOOO operation

Busan 12-640

-

Trust assets:

OOOOOO operation

Busan 12-642

-

Trust assets:

OOOOOO operation

Busan 12-658

-

Trust assets:

OOOOOO operation

1-1381

-

Trust assets:

OOOOOO operation

1-1908

-

Trust assets:

OOOOO-dong 1-1909

-

Trust assets:

OOOOOO operation

374-15

-

Trust assets:

OOOO-dong OO-dong 374-7

-

Trust assets:

(c) The deepening of excess of obligations due to donation contracts;

In the event that the rightB donated the instant real estate to the Defendant, as seen in the attached Table 2, exceeds the debt amounting to KRW 1,251,953,663, and KRW 7,860,582,420, the rightB’s gift of each of the instant real estate to the Defendant (her spouse) on October 2015, thereby deepening the excess of the debt amount by reducing the liability amount of KRW 923,00,000, which corresponds to the value of the instant real estate, and thus, constitutes a fraudulent act.

D. Sub-determination

The rightB predicted that the disposition for arrears, such as seizure of the real estate owned by himself, will be carried out under the taxation of capital gains tax, and donated the real estate in this case to the defendant, who is his spouse, on October 2015, and thereby, led to the situation that the plaintiff's tax claims cannot be satisfied, and thus, it shall be deemed as a fraudulent act.

4. The intention of an injury.

The rightB did not pay the transfer income tax despite its duty to pay, and completed the registration of ownership transfer of the instant real estate by donation to the Defendant, who is his spouse, and the rightB should be viewed as the fact that the Plaintiff notified the transfer income tax, but did not pay the tax, and thus, it should be deemed that the rightB had the intent to harm the Plaintiff, who is the tax payer, at the time of transferring

5. Bad faith presumption of the defendant

The defendant should be deemed to have known of the fact that such donation was a fraudulent act at the time of transfer of ownership of the real estate in this case as the spouse of the rightB and that there was a knowledge of the intention of the rightB's deception. Nevertheless, if there were special circumstances that the defendant had known about the fraudulent act and the intention of the rightB's deception, it is necessary to reverse all the above detailed circumstances.

6. Period of exclusion;

In order to settle delinquent taxes against the non-party in arrears, the real estate in this case was donated to the defendant, who is a person with a special relationship, in order to arrange delinquent taxes against the non-party in arrears. As of the date of the lawsuit in this case, one year from the date of becoming aware of the fraudulent act, and five years from the date of the fraudulent act, the limitation period of five years from the date of the fraudulent act is not imposed.

7. Conclusion

In light of the above facts, the transfer of ownership to the Defendant, who is the spouse, of the instant fraudulent act constitutes a fraudulent act by knowing that the transfer of ownership to the Defendant constitutes a fraudulent act, and the Defendant was also aware of such facts. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s cancellation of the gift agreement entered into between the rightB and the Defendant regarding the real estate stated in the separate sheet, such as the purport of the claim, and the Plaintiff’s cancellation of the transfer of ownership to the real estate listed in the separate sheet by seeking the cancellation of the transfer of ownership by seeking for the cancellation of the transfer of ownership