It shall constitute a fraudulent act to evade a tax liability.

After an investigation of property is conducted for the purpose of disposition on default, the act of making a registration of ownership transfer for the reason of donation on the real estate under the expected notice constitutes a fraudulent act, which is an act of a delinquent taxpayer, knowing that he would prejudice the plaintiff, who is a creditor, in order to evade tax liability.

2012 Gohap3183 Revocation of Fraudulent Act

Korea

Song XX

Pleadings without Oral Proceedings

November 22, 2012

1. The contract of donation concluded on March 3, 201 between the defendant and SongA with respect to each real estate listed in the separate sheet 1 and 2 shall be revoked.

2. The Defendant shall implement the procedure for registration of cancellation of ownership transfer registration, which was completed on March 4, 201 by the receipt No. 23247, with respect to the real estate listed in the attached Table 1 to Song-A.

3. The defendant shall implement the procedure for the registration of transfer of ownership on the ground of the restoration of the true name with respect to the parts in the separate sheet 2 attached hereto to the SongA.

4. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Indication of claim;

As shown in the reasons for the attachment

2. Judgment without holding any pleadings (Articles 257 (1) and 208 (3) 1 of the Civil Procedure Act);

Grounds of Claim

1. Relationship between Defendant SongB and Nonparty Song-A

SongB's honor to the Non-Party delinquent National Tax (hereinafter referred to as "non-party delinquent taxpayer") (A's family relation certificate No. 2).

2. Details on establishment of tax claims, which are preserved claims;

On December 17, 2010, the non-party transferred the land and building No. 1278-5 (hereinafter referred to as "transfer real estate") and did not report the transfer margin (hereinafter referred to as "transfer real estate") and did not report the transfer margin on December 31, 201, the non-party transferred the land and building No. 1278-4 (hereinafter referred to as "transfer real estate") in the Gyeongnam-do, 00, Kimhae-si, 00, 1278-5, 1278-2, 1278, 1278-7, 1278.

On July 31, 2012, the head of the Si/Gun/Gu tax office under the Plaintiff notified 000 won of capital gains tax by the due date for payment on July 31, 2012, but because the non-party did not pay it, he/she has reached KRW 000, including the additional dues. (A evidence 3 of capital gains tax)

3. Fraudulent act;

A. Although a taxpayer voluntarily reported and paid relevant national taxes in good faith pursuant to tax-related Acts, the Nonparty predicted that the liability to pay capital gains tax should be established and notified in the near future, or that the Nonparty completed the registration of transfer of ownership with the receipt number No. 23247 on March 3, 201, on the ground of the donation contract on March 3, 2011, the Changwon District Court Kim Jong-hae Registry of Korea (Evidence No. 4) as the receipt number No. 23247, which is the only property that can be appropriated for national tax under high probability.

B. Accordingly, the non-party becomes insolvent and the plaintiff has become unable to obtain satisfaction of a taxation claim.

C. National taxes for which the above liability to pay taxes was established are realized in reality by notifying the head of the competent tax office under his/her control of national taxes by the due date on July 31, 2012. However, the Nonparty did not pay the notified national taxes up to now, and the registration of transfer of ownership of the instant real estate to the Defendant is not a national tax to be notified, but a fraudulent act to evade the Plaintiff’s compulsory execution on the instant real estate due to a disposition in arrears of national taxes.

4. Intention and bad faith of the defendant;

In the event that the Nonparty predicted that the obligation to pay taxes would be established and that national taxes will be notified in the near future, it would have known that the Nonparty, the only new person owned by himself, would have known the Plaintiff at the time of transfer of ownership on the ground of donation to the Defendant. The Defendant, as the Nonparty’s children, should be deemed to have known the fact that the transfer was a fraudulent act and the intention of the Nonparty’s deliberation.

5. Whether the pertinent real estate is a well-grounded property

After the head of the Tong Young Tax Office under the jurisdiction of the plaintiff investigate the property of the non-party for the purpose of the disposition on default, the "real estate of this case" is the only property of the non-party (Evidence A No. 5).

6. Reinstatement; and

After acquiring ‘the instant real estate’, the Defendant offered the instant real estate as security among the instant real estate to BB agricultural cooperatives, and created a collateral with the receipt number of 34184 as of March 31, 201. Therefore, even if intending to cancel the fraudulent act and to cancel the registration of transfer due to restitution to the original state, bB agricultural cooperatives, a bona fide purchaser, can not oppose the registration of transfer, and as for the attached Table 2, as stated in the purport of the claim, I seek implementation of the registration procedure for transfer of real estate as stated in the attached Table 2, as it is difficult to expect consent to the registration of cancellation.

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

The plaintiff was issued on August 1, 2012 and became aware of the fraudulent act of this case in order to execute the disposition on default against the non-party that the real estate in this case was registered in the name of the defendant.

8. Lack;

In light of the above facts, the act of the non-party who completed the registration of ownership transfer to the defendant on the instant real estate on the ground of donation constitutes a fraudulent act, which is an act of knowing that it would prejudice the plaintiff, who is the creditor, in order to evade the non-party's tax liability. Therefore, the plaintiff is bound to file this lawsuit, such as the purport of the claim, in accordance with Article 406 of