Seoul Central District Court-2016-Gohap-75367 ( October 23, 2018)

Any creditor who has the right to revoke any donation or collusion made by the debtor to the defendant, but has exercised the right to revoke

It is difficult to see that the Defendant received the real estate sales price on behalf of the Defendant in excess of his/her obligation, according to the nature of the obligation, and it is difficult to view the donation or collusion payment.

Article 30 of the National Tax Collection Act Revocation of Fraudulent Act

Seoul High Court 2018Na2021430 Revocation of Fraudulent Act

Korea

aa

July 12, 2018

August 23, 2018

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

the Gu Office's place of service and place of service

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked. The contract of cash donation between the defendant and the non-party Bbb shall be revoked within the limit of xx members. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff x members and the amount calculated by the rate of 5% per annum from the day following the date of the final judgment of this case to the day of full payment.

1. Quotation, etc. of judgment in the first instance;

The reasons for this court's judgment shall be determined by the first instance court except that the relevant part of the judgment is dismissed as follows:

Because of the same reason, it is cited by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

○ 7 pages 7 3-14 Revised as follows:

(i) Whether the debtor is insolvent

㈎ 앞서 본 인정사실 및 갑 제10, 13호증, 을 제1호증의 각 기재에 변론 전체의 취지를 종합하면, 피고가 이 사건 토지의 매도대금을 지급받은 2014. 5. 13.과 2014. 5. 21. 및 2014. 6. 3. 당시 bbb의 적극재산과 소극재산은 아래 표와 같은 사실을 인정할 수 있다[bbb에 대한 '체납자재산등자료현황표(갑 제5호증)'에는 bbb가 이 사건 토지 외에도 서울 서대문구 연희동 137-15, 137-16 지상 건물과 AAA의 주식을 보유하고 있는 것처럼 기재되어 있으나, 갑 제1호증의 4, 을 제11호증의 각 기재에 의하여 인정할 수 있는 다음과 같은 사실 및 사정들, 즉 ① 위 건물은 피고와 ccc이 각 2분의 1 지분씩 공유하고 있었던 건물로서 bbb가 그 소유권을 취득한 사실이 없는 점, ② AAA는 2013. 10. 1. 해산되었는바 그 주식에 어떤 재산적 가치가 있다고 볼 수 없는 점 등에 비추어 보면, 이를 bbb의 적극재산으로 보기 어렵다].

The basis for the indication value of the property

actively

Property

1. Evidence No. 1 of this case x won of the land of this case

2. Account of Enterprise Bank (00) No. 13, x won A

x won of the aggregate of active properties x

negative

Property

1) Tax liabilities x1) A 10

x won of the sum of small-sized property x

b Net assets of bb = Total of positive assets - Total of passive assets)x won x

㈏ 따라서 bbb는 피고가 이 사건 토지의 가액에 상당하는 이 사건 토지의 매도대금을 수취함으로써 채무초과 상태에 이르렀다고 인정된다.

○ The following shall be added to the table 11 below:

⑤ Although the specific amount of the obligation that BB owes to D or the Defendant is unclear, it appears that it was derived from the process of entering into a business for a long period of time and sharing the obligation jointly with the Defendant and making the ownership of each immovable property jointly as joint collateral.

④ Considering the circumstances in which BB had been engaged in a business and exchanged with the Defendant for a long time, it is difficult to readily understand that bB donated a large amount of donation, such as the selling price of the instant land, to the Defendant, who is not a relative and relative relationship with B, when she left the Republic of Korea solely with her relatives.

2. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim shall be dismissed as it is without merit. The judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.