It does not constitute a right arising before the trust, not before the trust is held;

The Defendants cannot receive dividends from the executing court’s auction for the instant land, which is the trust property, and should distribute all the amount to be actually distributed to the Plaintiff, who is the mortgagee.

Article 22 (Prohibition of Compulsory Execution, etc.)

2013 Gohap561985 Undue gains

IsaA

Republic of Korea, Chuncheon

April 25, 2014

May 23, 2014

1. The Plaintiff, Defendant Republic of Korea shall pay 00 won and 20% interest per annum from December 24, 2013 to the day of full payment, and Defendant Chuncheon shall pay 00 won per annum to the day of full payment, and 20% interest per annum from December 27, 2013 to the day of full payment.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the Defendants.

3. Paragraph 1 can be provisionally executed.

Cheong-gu Office

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Basic facts

A. BB(BB) was changed to BB, Inc.(hereinafter “BB”) on February 27, 2007, the trade name was changed to C’C’C (hereinafter “CCC”) from Chuncheon-si, Bupyeong-dong, 000-00 m2 (hereinafter “CCC”) to 8265 m2 (hereinafter “the instant land”). As to the land of this case, the right to collateral security (hereinafter “the instant right to collateral security”) was established against the maximum debt amount of KRW 0 billion.0 billion with respect to the land of this case.

B. On January 14, 2008, CCC completed the registration of ownership transfer on the instant land in the OO asset trust, Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant trust”).

C. On August 1, 2011, Defendant Chuncheon seized the instant land by taking CCC as the delinquent taxpayer.

Tax creditors' statutory due date of tax payment

Republic of Korea Gross Real Estate Tax: 15.00 won on December 1, 2007

Chuncheon City

Property tax (land) KRW 0.00 on September 1, 2007

Property tax (land) KRW 0.00 on September 1, 2008

Business office tax, 10.00 won on January 1, 2009

Business office tax, 10.00 won on January 1, 2009

Property tax (land) KRW 0.00 on September 1, 2009

Property tax (land) KRW 0.00 on September 1, 2010

Property tax (land) KRW 0.00 on September 1, 201

Property tax (land) KRW 0.00 on September 1, 2012

Total 0000 won

D. On February 10, 2012, the Plaintiff: (a) transferred BB’s instant right to collateral security in sequence through DD Co., Ltd; and (b) completed the supplementary registration before the said right to collateral security.

E. Upon the Plaintiff’s application, the voluntary auction procedure with respect to the instant real estate conducted by the Chuncheon District Court No. 201092, Sept. 16, 2013; the court of execution shall distribute KRW 000,000, out of the amount of KRW 000 to be actually distributed on September 16, 2013, to the Defendant Republic of Korea, who is the right to issue the pertinent tax, to the Defendant, who is the right to issue the pertinent tax, in one order; the distribution schedule was prepared to distribute the remainder to the Plaintiff, who is the right to deliver the said tax; and the distribution schedule was made upon the confirmation of the said distribution schedule. As such, when the distribution schedule became final and conclusive, both the Defendant and the Defendant Republic of Korea, which distributed dividends, and the detailed details are as follows.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. Legal doctrine

Article 2 of the Trust Act refers to the transfer or security of a specific property by a truster to a trustee by the truster.

Article 22(1) of the same Act provides that "No disposition on default shall be taken against trust property, such as compulsory execution, an auction to exercise a security right, a preservative measure, national tax, etc., against the trust property, etc., and any other disposition shall be taken against the trustee to manage, dispose of, operate, or develop such property for the benefit of the beneficiary or for a specific purpose, and any other act necessary for accomplishing the purpose of the trust."

According to the purpose of Article 2 of the Trust Act, trust property under the Trust Act shall have ownership inside and outside the country.

Article 22(1) of the Trust Act provides that a trust property shall be subject to compulsory execution or auction against a trust property, and Article 22(1) of the Trust Act provides that if a trust property is a national or local tax imposed on a truster in relation to the trust property before the trust under the Trust Act is performed, if the tax claim is not subject to seizure before the trust under the Trust Act is performed, it shall not be deemed that the tax claim falls under "the right arising from the trust before the trust is performed" under the proviso of Article 22(1) of the Trust Act, which exceptionally permits compulsory execution or auction against the trust property (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 96Da17424, Oct. 15, 1996); and Article 22(1) of the Trust Act provides that compulsory execution or auction against the trust property shall be included in "right arising from the trust business" under the proviso of Article 22(1) of the Trust Act that exceptionally permits compulsory execution or auction against the trust property.

In light of the above legal principles, since the taxation claim of this case, which comes before the statutory due date among the taxation claims of this case (the claims of the Republic of Korea comprehensive real estate holding tax in 2007 and the claims of the property tax in 2007) did not seize the land of this case based on the taxation claims before the trust of this case takes place, it cannot be deemed as falling under the "rights arising before the trust" under the proviso of Article 22 (1) of the Trust Act, and since the legal due date comes after the trust of this case (the claims of the property tax from 2008 to 2012, and the business office tax amount in 209 to the truster of this case) is the debtor, it cannot be deemed as falling under the "right arising from the execution procedure of the trust affairs" under the proviso of Article 22 (1) of the Trust Act, and since the defendants cannot receive dividends from the auction procedure of the court of execution on the land of this case, which is the trust property of this case, and it cannot be deemed as the dividends of the plaintiff's dividends from each of this case.

Therefore, Defendant Republic of Korea is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff 20% interest per annum from December 24, 2013 to the day following the day of delivery of a copy of the complaint against Defendant Republic of Korea sought by the Plaintiff, and from December 24, 2013 to the day of full payment, the amount equivalent to 20% interest per annum as stipulated by the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, etc., from the day following the day of receipt of dividends on the amount of KRW 000 to the day of full payment, and from December 27, 2013 to the day following the day of delivery of a copy of the complaint against Defendant Chuncheon City sought by the Plaintiff.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim against the defendants of this case is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition with the assent of all.