Whether the only property constitutes a fraudulent act by gift

(1) The gift of real estate, which is the sole property, constitutes an act of undermining the creditor, barring special circumstances.

The contents of the decision shall be the same as attached.

Article 30 of the National Tax Collection Act (Cancellation of Fraudulent Act)

1. Revocation of each gift agreement entered into on January 29, 2007 with respect to each real estate listed in the separate sheet between the defendant and the Do○○○○.

2. The defendant shall implement the procedure for cancellation registration of each transfer of ownership completed in accordance with No. 4882 and No. 4883 on January 29, 2007 with respect to each real estate listed in the separate sheet with the Busan District Court's Dong Branch, Busan District Court's Dong Branch, ○○○ Registry, and each of them

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

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Basic facts

The following facts are not disputed between the parties, or may be acknowledged by comprehensively taking into account the whole purport of the pleadings in each entry in Gap evidence 1 through 5, evidence 6-1 through 4, evidence 7, 8, evidence 9-1, 2, and 3.

A. From March 29, 2006 to September 30, 2006, door ○○○○○-dong ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○, and filed a value-added tax return on 2006, without omitting sales revenue, the head of the tax office affiliated with the Plaintiff issued a notice of rectification and correction of value-added tax as indicated below in relation to the operation of the above game place.” (B) On the other hand, on the other hand, between the Defendant on January 29, 207 and the Defendant on January 29, 2007, each gift contract on each of the real estate listed in the separate list (hereinafter referred to as the “instant real estate”). On the other hand, on the same day, the Plaintiff’s title transfer registration was made to the Plaintiff’s ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○.

2. Determination

(a)the existence of preserved claims;

First, the Plaintiff has a tax claim against ○○ as above.

Meanwhile, even though it is required that a claim that can be protected by the obligee's right of revocation was created prior to the act that can be viewed as a fraudulent act in principle, it is highly probable that at the time of the fraudulent act had a legal relationship that is the basis of the establishment of the claim, and that the claim should be established in the near future. In the near future, the possibility of realizing it in the near future, and where a claim has been established as a result of the establishment of the claim, the claim can also be the preserved claim of the obligee's right of revocation. As can be known from the above basic facts, although there was no claim against the Plaintiff's door ○ at the time of the contract of this case, there was a high probability that the obligation to pay value-added tax, which serves as the basis of the establishment of the above claim, was already established, and that the above claim should be established in the near future, and since there was no few months thereafter, the above claim can be the preserved claim of the obligee's right of revocation in relation to the donation contract of this case.

(b) The establishment of speculative acts and intent to injure himself;

According to the above facts of recognition, ○○ constitutes an act of undermining the Plaintiff, a creditor, barring any special circumstances. Furthermore, considering the circumstances, etc. at the time of the donation contract as seen earlier, ○○ was aware that it would prejudice the general creditor, and it is presumed that the Defendant, a beneficiary, was malicious.

(c) Cancellation and reinstatement;

Therefore, the gift contract of this case must be revoked by fraudulent act, and the defendant is obligated to implement the procedure for cancellation registration of each transfer of ownership as stated in Paragraph (2) of this case's order with respect to the real estate of this case to ○○.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant is justified, and it is decided as per Disposition by admitting it.