logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2019.01.24 2018가합54120
사해행위취소
Text

1. The contract of donation concluded on October 17, 2016 by the Defendant and B with respect to each real estate listed in the separate sheet shall be revoked.

Reasons

1. The following facts do not conflict between the Parties:

The Plaintiff’s taxation claim No. B 1) The head of the leisure tax office had conducted a tax investigation into the Plaintiff Company C (hereinafter “C”) from January 20, 2014 to February 6, 2015. During that process, B discovered the fact that the Plaintiff had been awarded a contract for electrical construction from 2010 to 2012 and had omitted sales from the sales. (ii) The head of the Seodaemun-gu District Tax Office notified the Plaintiff of the taxation data on B of the taxation data to explain the omission of the sales to B on July 20, 2016.

3) Based on the results of the tax investigation into C by the director of the Gwangju Tax Office, the head of the Gwangju Tax Office issued a revised and notified each of the following dispositions to B, respectively (hereinafter “each of the instant dispositions”). On July 17, 2017, the head of the Gwangju Tax Office issued a contract for the electrical construction on the following grounds: (a) on January 1, 2010, value-added tax (value-added tax) 92,333,070; (b) 54,382,610, 2011, 108,017,50, 215, 870, 117,02, 680, 2012, 162, 742, 520, 2017: (c) on the premise that the construction of the instant electrical construction was not executed as an employee of the Gwangju Tax Office; (b) on the grounds that it was unlawful for C to cancel the construction of each of the instant electrical construction works on the grounds that:

However, on September 13, 2018, the Gwangju District Court deliberated on the instant case, dismissed B’s claim on the ground that “B had been executed by being awarded a contract for electrical construction from C, and thus, B’s claim on the premise that the instant disposition under the premise that B had been executed by being awarded a contract for electrical construction from C is lawful.”

(2017Guhap923). B as at the time of appeal against the above judgment, the above case is pending in the Gwangju High Court 2018Nu5733.

B. B Disposition No. 1 of this case

arrow