If a defaulted taxpayer does a legal act for the sole purpose of evading the collection of national taxes;

If a taxpayer does a legal act with the sole object of property to avoid any collection of national taxes in executing any disposition for arrears, the tax officials may request the court to cancel and reinstate the fraudulent act.

Article 30 of the National Tax Collection Act: Revocation and Restoration of Fraudulent Act

2017 Ghana 64592 Revocation of Fraudulent Act

Korea

○ ○

March 15, 2018

March 29, 2018

1. The reservation to trade concluded on January 9, 2017 with respect to real estate listed in the separate sheet between the defendant and the SiA shall be revoked.

2. 피고는 심AA에게 별지 목록 기재 부동산에 관하여 울산지방법원 20◎◎. ◎◎. ◎◎. 접수 제◎◎◎◎호로 경료된 소유권이전청구권가등기의 말소등기절차를 이행하라.

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

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. As of January 9, 2017, the Plaintiff had a total of KRW 515,128,490 (based on the notified tax amount) against the late 2015,128,490 (based on the notified tax amount) against the late 2017 (transfer transaction subject to taxation was conducted in 2012 and 2016), and there was no amount repaid out of the above transfer income tax bonds until now.

B. On January 9, 2017, the lateA entered into a promise to sell and purchase real estate listed in the separate sheet owned by the lateA (hereinafter referred to as the “instant real estate”) with the Defendant, who is his father, and on the same day, the instant promise to sell and purchase the real estate as indicated in the separate sheet owned by the lateA (hereinafter referred to as the “instant promise to sell and purchase”). On the same day, the right to claim transfer of ownership as stated in

C. At the time of the instant promise to sell and purchase, the obligation of the SiA was solely imposed on the Plaintiff with the tax liability of KRW 515,128,490 as well as the said tax liability of KRW 271,596,695 as active property (=total amount of KRW 268,265,116 (based on the standard market price) + deposit KRW 3,331,579).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 14, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

According to the above facts, the conclusion of the promise to sell and purchase the instant real estate by the SiA, which had already been missing in excess of the debt, constitutes a fraudulent act that reduces the obligor’s joint collateral for creditors, including the Plaintiff, and the intention of the SiA’s intent to harm is recognized. As such, the instant promise to sell and purchase the instant real estate should be revoked as a fraudulent act, and accordingly, the registration of the right to claim transfer of ownership under Paragraph (2) of the Disposition shall be revoked.

On the other hand, the defendant argued that since 2011, the defendant lent 420,000,000 won or more to the SiA, and that the contract was made due to the principal and interest not paid, and thus, the contract cannot be a fraudulent act. However, the defendant's allegation cannot be accepted on the ground that the fraudulent act of the contract cannot be avoided solely for the reasons as alleged above.

The Defendant also asserted that the SiA was not in a state of debt excess at the time of the instant promise to sell and purchase, but this also cannot be accepted for the same reason as seen above.

3. Conclusion

The plaintiff's claim is justified and accepted.