act of making a donation of property solely to his or her child constitutes a fraudulent act

In the absence of special circumstances, the act of a delinquent taxpayer who has already been in excess of his/her obligation donated to his/her children constitutes fraudulent act in relation to his/her claims.

Article 30 of the National Tax Collection Act

2014 Ghana 33828 Revocation of Fraudulent Act

OA et al.

Korea

July 16, 2015

August 13, 2015

1.OBOOO(OO-OOOO) and

A. The gift agreement entered into on December 5, 2012 with respect to the real estate listed in paragraph (1) of the attached Table No. 1 between Defendant OraA, and (b) the gift agreement entered into on December 30, 2013 between Defendant OraCC, respectively, is revoked.

2. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant Ora shall pay 36,198,800 won and 5% interest per annum from the day following the day when the judgment of this case is finalized to the day of full payment. Defendant Ora shall pay 14,750,000 won and 5% interest per annum from the day following the day when the judgment of this case is finalized to the day of full payment.

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

The same shall apply to the order of the Gu office.

1. Basic facts

A. A. AB completed the registration of ownership transfer on July 10, 1979 due to sale on July 5, 1979 with respect to the real estate listed in Paragraph 1 of the Attached List, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on August 26, 1989 due to sale on August 16, 1989.

B. (1) On September 20, 201, OB transferred 203m2, OB, OB, OB, OB, and made a preliminary return of capital gains tax on November 18, 201 on the premise that the said real estate falls under farmland subject to reduction or exemption of capital gains tax. OB transferred 123-3m2, OB, OB, OB, and made a preliminary return of capital gains tax on the premise that the said real estate falls under farmland subject to reduction or exemption of capital gains tax. On February 24, 2012, OB transferred 123-3m2, OB, OB, OB, OB, and made a preliminary return of capital gains tax on the premise that the said real estate falls under farmland subject to reduction or exemption of capital gains tax.

Secondly, on June 2, 2014, on the ground that the real estate stated in the above (i) and Doll is not farmland subject to reduction or exemption of capital gains tax, the head of the OOB decided and notified on June 30, 2014 on the capital gains tax amounting to KRW 91,015,880 and the due date for payment on June 30, 2014 (hereinafter referred to as the "capital gains tax of this case").

다. ⑴ ㈎ 피고 오AA는 오BB으로부터 별지 목록 제1항 기재 부동산에 관하여

2012. 12. 5. 증여(이하 '이 사건 제1증여'라고 한다)를 원인으로 2012. 12. 31. 소유권이전등기를 경료받았다. ㈏ 그 후 별지 목록 제1항 기재 부동산에 관하여 2013. 1. 10. 채무자는 피고오AA, 채권최고액은 3억 2500만 원(2014. 4. 14. 변경등기 : 채권최고액 2억 7300만원)으로 하는 OO축산업협동조합의 근저당권설정등기가, 2014. 4. 18. 채권최고액은 4500만 원, 채무자는 피고 오AA로 하는 조VV의 근저당권설정등기가 각 마쳐졌다. ⑵ ㈎ 피고 오CC는 오BB으로부터 별지 목록 제2항 기재 부동산에 관하여

2013. 12. 30. 증여(이하 '이 사건 제2증여'라고 한다)를 원인으로 2013. 12. 31. 소유권이전등기를 경료받았다. ㈏ 그 후 별지 목록 제1항 기재 부동산에 관하여 2014. 2. 5. 매매를 원인으로 2014. 3. 7. 이XX 명의의 소유권이전등기가 마쳐졌다.

Fidelity B was in excess of the obligation at the time of the first and second donation of this case.

Applicant The value of the real estate stated in paragraph 1 of the attached list is 36,198,800 won and the value of the real estate stated in paragraph 2 of the attached list is 14,750,000 won.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 9, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to preserved claims

In principle, it is required that a claim that can be protected by the obligee's right of revocation has arisen before an act that can be viewed as a fraudulent act was committed. However, at the time of the fraudulent act, there is a high probability that there has already been legal relations that form the basis of establishment of the claim, and that the claim should be established in the near future by such legal relations, and in the near future, where a claim has been created as a claim is realized and its probability has been realized in the near future,

According to the above, OB is obligated to pay the transfer income tax of this case to the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff’s transfer income tax claim against OB is the obligee’s right of revocation for the first and second donation of this case.

B. Determination on fraudulent act

According to the above, OB’s donation of real estate listed in the separate sheet to the Defendants constitutes a fraudulent act in relation to the obligees unless there are special circumstances.

C. Determination as to the intention to commit suicide

OB is determined to have been aware that the donation No. 1 and 2 of this case would prejudice the creditors’ interests, and further, the Defendants, a beneficiary, were aware of it, barring any special circumstances.

D. In the instant case where the scope of revocation of fraudulent act and the method of restitution to the original state is impossible or considerably difficult, the donation should be revoked as a fraudulent act. As seen earlier, Defendant OA is obligated to pay damages for delay calculated at the rate of 5% per annum under the Civil Act from the day following the day when the judgment of this case became final and conclusive to the day of full payment, and Defendant OCC is obligated to pay damages for delay at the rate of 14,750,000 per annum under the Civil Act from the day following the day when the judgment of this case becomes final and conclusive to the day when full payment is made.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim against the defendants is with merit, and all of them are accepted, and it is so decided as per Disposition.