Whether it constitutes a fraudulent act

At the time when a park is calculated, there exists the basis for taxation claims and it is anticipated that national taxes will be levied on oneself, and the act of donation of real estate to the defendant to be exempted from national taxes in arrears is subject to revocation of fraudulent act.

Article 30 (Cancellation of Fraudulent Act) of the National Tax Collection Act

2013 Ghana 216741 Revocation of Fraudulent Act

Korea

KimA

March 25, 2014

1. The contract of donation concluded on February 10, 201 between the defendant and the non-party KimB is revoked.

2. The defendant, with respect to the real estate stated in the separate sheet against the non-party KimB, XX district court support

Registration and procedures for registration of cancellation of transfer of ownership completed by No. 4272 on February 11, 2011 shall be implemented.

(n)

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

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Indication of claims: It shall be as shown in attached Form; and

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

Grounds of Claim

1.the formation of tax claims;

(a) Status of parties;

The plaintiff is a creditor who is the non-party BB, who has a national tax claim of KRW 371,140,460,000, and the defendant AA is the child of BB (AB).

(b) Taxation details;

소외 체납자 BBB은 1999. 4. 22.부터 2011. 6. 9.까지 XX시 XX구 XX동 XX번지 XX빌딩 XXX호에서 서비스/복합운송주선업을 영위 "XXXXXX(주)"(이하 '소외 회사'라고 합니다)의 대표자로 2006년 귀속 ~ 2010년 귀속 인정상여 처분에 종합소득세 합계 346,001,630원을 고지하였습니다.

Of the taxation claims against Nonparty BB, KRW 371,140,460, total of 4 cases of global income tax for the year 2006 from 2010 to 2010, the notice of national tax payment may be the preserved claim against the right to revoke the fraudulent act in accordance with the following legal principles.

“A claim is not yet established at the time of a fraudulent act, but before that time, if the tax obligor appropriates a temporary park in a company whose representative is the tax obligor, and the tax authority disposed of the said temporary park as a result of the disposal of the global income tax by the recognition of the tax obligor, the said taxation claim was already based legal relations at the time when the provisional park was appropriated, and there was a high probability that the claim would have been established in the near future, and the claim was established as a result of the realization of the probability, and thus the creditor’s right to revocation may become the creditor’s preserved claim (Supreme Court Decision 2000Da37821 Decided March 23, 201).”

2. Fraudulent act;

BB made a non-party company’s representative and non-party company’s non-party company’s non-report on the disposal of income, and the director of Yangcheon Tax Office under the Plaintiff’s control of BB notified the non-party company of 4 other global income tax on May 1, 2012. On February 10, 2011, the real estate stated in the separate sheet, which is his property, was donated to the Defendant, who is a related party, and the transfer of ownership was registered and became insolvent, and thus, it is obvious that it was for the purpose of undermining the Plaintiff, the tax

3. Reduction and excess of liability assets;

On February 10, 2011, the date of the instant fraudulent act, Nonparty BB’s active property is KRW 511,408, and KRW 78,847,500, totaling KRW 79,358,90,00, which is the total amount of KRW 346,01,40, and KRW 78,847,50,00, which is the real property preserved in the instant case. Therefore, Nonparty BB’s donation of real property recorded in the attached list to the Defendant, which was the debt excess, to prevent the satisfaction of the Plaintiff’s taxation claim by reducing the obligor’s responsible property.

4.The intention of the deceased;

Although Nonparty BB had paid the revised comprehensive income tax on the disposition of income by being recognized by the non-party company, Nonparty BB would have known that, on February 10, 201, the donation to the Defendant, who is a related party, was made to the Defendant on February 10, 201.

5. Bad faith of the defendant

The defendant is the child of the non-party BB and the non-party BB was in excess of the debt at the time of the fraudulent act, so the defendant should be deemed to have known the fact that the gift of this case was a fraudulent act and the intention of the non-party BB's will to understand.

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

As above, the date Nonparty BB becomes aware of the fact that the Defendant donated the instant real estate to the Defendant was issued a certified copy of the register of the instant real estate at the time of examination of the selection of the subject of tracking investigation.

7.Felling

As seen above, since the act of BB’s donation of the instant real estate to the Defendant was a fraudulent act to harm the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff was bringing about the claim in order to collect national taxes in arrears by seeking procedures for registration of cancellation of ownership transfer registration, such as the purport of restitution by revocation of fraudulent act, as in the manner of restitution by the Plaintiff.