Fraudulent Act

An act of a debtor in excess of his/her obligation, the only property of which is the creditor, offering real estate as security to any one of the obligees, becomes a fraudulent act in relation to the other obligees, unless there are special circumstances.

Article 30 of the National Tax Collection Act Revocation

1. The purchase and sale reservation made on May 30, 2005 between Nonparty 00 and Nonparty 000 shall be revoked.

2. The sales contract concluded on May 30, 2005 between Nonparty 00 and the Defendants on real estate stated in the separate sheet shall be revoked.

3. The Defendants shall implement the procedure for the registration of cancellation of the ownership transfer registration completed on October 0, 2006 by the Incheon District Court No. 0000 as to the real estate stated in the separate sheet to the Plaintiff, and the registration procedure for cancellation of the ownership transfer registration completed on October 0, 2006 by the Incheon District Court No. 000.

4. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Defendants.

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Basic facts

The following facts are not disputed between the parties, or can be acknowledged in full view of the whole purport of the pleadings in each statement of evidence Nos. 1-3, 2-1, 3, and 3.

A. As of April 30, 2005, 000, the Plaintiff had a large amount of tax liability including the tax liability of KRW 245,764,411 against the Plaintiff.

B. On May 30, 2005, 000 entered the provisional registration of the right to claim ownership transfer (hereinafter referred to as the "provisional registration of the right to claim ownership transfer of this case") in the Incheon District Court No. 67294, Jun. 22, 2005, which entered into a trade reservation (hereinafter referred to as the "sale reservation of this case") with the husband of 000, the husband of 000, and completed the provisional registration of the right to claim ownership transfer of this case.

C. On May 30, 2005, 000 entered into a sales contract with Defendant 000, a woman living together, and Defendant 000,000, a child of the above Defendant (hereinafter “instant sales contract”). On January 6, 2006, the Incheon District Court completed the registration of ownership transfer (hereinafter “instant transfer”) as the receipt No. 1348 on January 6, 2006.

D. At the time of the above promise to sell and purchase and the sales contract, 000 was in excess of the obligation, and there was no particular property other than the instant real estate.

E. The 000 died on July 29, 2005, and his inheritor has the defendant 00 (child), the defendant 000 (child), and the defendant 000 (child).

2. The establishment of a fraudulent act;

The Plaintiff’s taxation rights are preserved by the obligee’s right of revocation, as the Plaintiff’s taxation rights have already existed at the time of concluding the instant sales contract between 000 and the Defendants at the time of signing the instant sales contract with the Defendants.

In addition, the act of an obligor in excess of his/her obligation offering real estate to any one of the obligees as collateral is a fraudulent act in relation to the other obligees unless there are special circumstances (see Supreme Court Decision 2000Da43352, Apr. 12, 2002).

In the instant case, inasmuch as the instant real estate, the sole property of which exceeds 000, was offered as security and was transferred as payment in substitutes to the Defendants, and was transferred to the Defendants, the instant promise to sell and purchase between the Defendants, and if the instant sales contract was concluded with the Defendants, the instant promise to sell and sell the instant real estate constitutes a fraudulent act detrimental to the Plaintiff, the creditor, barring special circumstances.

On the other hand, the debtor 00 is presumed to have been aware that there was a shortage of joint collateral due to the above act of disposal of property, and further, the beneficiary is 000 and the defendant's bad faith is presumed.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

The Defendants asserted that the purchase and sale agreement of this case was concluded as a partial performance of the claim amounting to KRW 50 million lent by Defendant 00 million, and thus, they cannot respond to the Plaintiff’s claim. As seen earlier, the act of an obligor in excess of his/her obligation offered real estate to any one of the obligees as collateral constitutes a fraudulent act in relation to the other obligees, barring special circumstances. Thus, the Defendants’ above assertion is without merit.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the instant promise between 000 and 000 regarding the instant real estate and the instant sales contract between the Defendants constitutes a fraudulent act, and thus, each of them is revoked, and thus, the Defendants are obligated to implement the procedure for the provisional registration of the instant claim for ownership transfer and the cancellation registration of the instant transfer of ownership. As such, the Defendants are obligated to implement the procedure for the registration of the instant claim for ownership transfer

The claim shall be accepted on the basis of the reasons therefor.