The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).

1. In case where a share donation contract is revoked by a judgment revoking a fraudulent act, and shares reinstated under an obligor’s name are sold in the procedure of compulsory auction, the Securities Transaction Tax Act provides that the transfer of share certificates or shares (hereinafter “share certificates”) shall be subject to the securities transaction tax (Article 1 and the main sentence of Article 2), while “transfer” refers to that where the ownership is transferred at a cost due to contractual or legal causes.

(Article 1-2(3). The tax base shall be the transfer value of share certificates per se (Article 7), and the taxpayer shall vary depending on the method of transferring shares or alternative settlement, and the Korea Securities Depository, etc. shall collect and pay the securities transaction tax from the transferor of share certificates or pay it directly by the transferor of share certificates

(Articles 3 and 9) This also applies to the former Securities Transaction Tax Act (amended by Act No. 9274 of Dec. 26, 2008; hereinafter the same) that applies to the instant case, and only the location and expression of the provisions are different.

(See Articles 1 (main sentence), 2 (3), 3, 7, and 9 of the former Securities Transaction Tax Act. Such securities transaction tax is a circulation tax imposed on a transferor of share certificates as a taxpayer regardless of the occurrence of profit by circulating the fact that the transfer of share certificates is a onerous transfer of share certificates.

(1) The obligee’s right to revoke the obligor’s fraudulent act and restores assets out of the obligor’s responsible property so that the obligee may enforce compulsory execution (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Da84352, Apr. 24, 2008). The obligee’s right to revoke the obligee’s right to revoke the obligor’s fraudulent act and the obligee’s right to revoke the fraudulent act and restores assets out of the obligor’s responsible property (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Da84352, Apr. 24, 2008).