Whether a case concerning a real estate donation contract is revoked by fraudulent act

At the time of a fraudulent act, there was a high probability of the establishment of a claim in the near future, based on the legal relationship, and in the near future, the claim may also become the right of revocation of the claim in the near future where the claim has been created because the probability has been realized in the near future.

1. The contract of donation concluded on June 7, 2005 between the defendant and the non-party ○○ shall be revoked.

2. The defendant will implement the procedure for the registration of transfer of ownership on the real estate stated in the attached list to the non-party ○○.

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

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Basic facts

A. From May 9, 2005 to June 10, 2005, the head of ○○ Tax Office under the Plaintiff-affiliated tax office conducted a survey on the source of funds to acquire the apartment houses located in Seoul ○○-dong 1622-5, which was acquired as of July 14, 1995 with respect to the non-party credit, and notified the said new ○○○○○ of KRW 51,514,50 of the gift tax on August 1, 2005.

B. On June 7, 2005, the above new ○○ entered into a donation contract with the Defendant, the mother, on the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “the instant real estate”) which is the only property of his woman, during the pertinent tax investigation period, and completed the registration of ownership transfer as the receipt of No. 26561 on June 8, 2005.

(Ground for recognition: Facts without dispute, evidence Nos. 1 to 7 (including a branch number), the whole purport of the pleading.

2. Determination

(a) the existence of the right to preserve;

In principle, it is required that a claim that can be protected by the obligee’s right of revocation has arisen prior to the commission of an act that can be viewed as a fraudulent act. However, there was a high probability that at the time of the fraudulent act, there was a legal relationship that has already been based on which the claim was established, and that the claim is established in the near future. In fact, where a claim has been established as a result of realizing the possibility in the near future, the claim may also become a right to be preserved by the obligee’s right of revocation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2000Da17346, Jun. 27, 2000). According to the above facts, according to the above facts, the legal relationship that had already been established as of June 7, 2005, which is the date of the conclusion of the gift contract of this case (acquisition of a row as of July 14, 195), and even if such notice was made thereafter, it is highly probable that it constitutes a right of revocation’s right of revocation.

B. Establishment of fraudulent act

The act of donation to the Defendant, the mother of the instant real estate, the sole property of which ○○, was made by the Defendant, becomes a fraudulent act in relation to the Plaintiff, the obligee, and the Defendant’s bad faith is presumed to be a beneficiary.

C. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

As to this, the defendant alleged that the real estate of this case was acquired by bearing the full amount of the purchase price, and that it was returned after the title trust to the above new ○○, his father, his father, at the time of the purchase, and that the contract of this case does not constitute a fraudulent act, but it is not sufficient to recognize the contract of this case with each statement (including each number) of evidence Nos. 1 through 6 alone, and there is no other evidence to recognize it.

(d) Conclusion

Therefore, the contract of donation on the instant real estate between the defendant and the new ○○○ shall be revoked as a fraudulent act, and the defendant shall be obliged to implement the procedure for ownership transfer registration on the instant real estate to be restored to its original state due to the revocation of fraudulent act.

3. Conclusion

Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable and acceptable.

Table 3

The indication of one building

Gyeonggi-do ○○-si 15, 15-2, 15-1 Dong-dong

3rd floor of reinforced concrete slive roof

537.66m2 per floor

2nd floor 537.66 square meters

537.66 square meters for 3 floors

576.72㎡ in an underground room

Indication of land which is the object of site ownership

1. Gyeonggi-do ○○○-gun, Gyeonggi-do ○○-gun 16 square meters and 366 square meters;

2. Gyeonggi-do ○○○-gun, Gyeonggi-do ○○-do 34-4 square meters and 109 square meters.

3. Gyeonggi-do ○○○-gun, Gyeonggi-do ○○-gun 31 square meters 2,410 square meters.

Indication of the building for exclusive use

The first floor is a reinforced concrete building 104m25.08m2

Indication of Site Ownership

1,2,3 Ownership 48/2.85 ends.