Whether a fraudulent act is subject to revocation

The act of transfer of ownership on real estate between the debtor and the defendants shall be subject to revocation of fraudulent act, even though it is known that the taxation claims are harmed in order to be exempted from the disposition of default on national taxes.

Article 30 (Cancellation of Fraudulent Act)

1. Each non-party 000 (*************) and

A. A sales contract concluded on December 28, 2004 with respect to the share of 4958/12746 among the real estates listed in the attached list between Defendant 00 and Defendant 00

B. Defendant 00 entered into a sales contract on December 28, 2004 with respect to 3305/12746 shares among the real estates listed in the separate sheet

C. The contract of donation concluded on December 28, 2004 with respect to the share of 1653/12746 of the real estate stated in the separate sheet between Defendant 00 and Defendant 100 shall be revoked.

2. Nonparty 00

A. Defendant 00, as to the portion of 4958/12746 of the real estate listed in the separate sheet, implements the registration procedure for transfer of ownership on the ground of restitution due to the cancellation of the revocation of the commission of a fraudulent act;

B. Defendant 00, with respect to 3305/12746/127 of the real estate listed in the separate sheet, implements the procedure for cancellation, etc. of ownership transfer registration completed under No. 32591 of the receipt of December 28, 2004;

C. As to the portion of 1653/12746 out of the real estate indicated in the attached list, Defendant 00 will implement the procedure for cancelling the registration of transfer of ownership, which was completed under No. 32592 on December 28, 2004, by the 00 local court 00 registry office.

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

Grounds of Claim

1. Formation of preserved claims;

(a) Circumstances of taxation;

"Foreign 00 (*************) is notified of 00 viewing in violation of the Act on the Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder's Name, and 463.23 square meters of equity (463.23 square meters: hereinafter referred to as "transfer real estate") out of 15 July 2003, 203, 463.23 square meters of equity among 2,112 square meters of equity (4.00 square meters: hereinafter referred to as "transfer real estate") were transferred, and the head of tax office under the jurisdiction of the plaintiff has notified 58,105,970 won of capital gains tax on July 01, 2005, but has not paid until now. In addition, as of December 28, 2004, 100 won of value-added tax on October 2, 197, 200, 100 won of global income tax and 3010-1308.

(unit: Won)

Items of Taxation

Deadline for payment

Amount in arrears

Reversion Year

Date of establishment of tax liability;

relevant documentary evidence

Transfer Income Tax

02.10.22

179,040

201

201.09.14

A 1-1

Global Income Tax

03.08.31

3,262,240

202

December 31, 2002

A1-2

Transfer Income Tax

05.07.31

66,821,840

2003

203.07.15

A1-3

guidance.

3 Cases

70,263,180

B. Establishment of preserved claims

The notice of national tax against the non-party 00 may be the preserved claim against the right to revoke the fraudulent act in accordance with the following legal principles regarding the establishment of the preserved claim after the date of the fraudulent act in this case or the establishment of the preserved claim.

In principle, it is required that a claim protected by the right to revoke a claim has arisen prior to the commission of an act that can be viewed as a fraudulent act. However, there is high probability that at the time of a fraudulent act, the legal relationship which serves as the basis of the establishment of a claim has already occurred and that would be based on such legal relationship in the near future, and where a claim has been established as a result of its realization in the near future, such claim may also become a preserved claim, and the legal relationship that serves as the basis of the establishment of a claim is not limited to the legal relationship under an agreement between the parties, but shall be deemed to include the quasi-legal relationship or factual relations, etc. with the probability of the establishment of the claim (see Supreme Court Decision 2002Da42957, Nov. 8

According to the above legal principles, the transfer income tax of this case is a national tax to be paid after voluntary declarations within two months from the last day of the month to which the transfer date belongs, and there was a legal relationship that is already subject to the taxation requirement of tax collection prior to December 28, 2004, which is the fraudulent act of this case, and thus, there was a high probability that the national tax of this case may occur and its probability was realized in the near future, and the notice of national tax was issued, so there is no defect that the national tax of this case becomes a preserved claim.

2. Occurrence of fraudulent act;

Pursuant to Section 00 of this title, I, after the date on which the liability to pay national taxes has been established, have been stated in the attached Table (hereinafter referred to as “instant real estate”) which is one’s own property

① On December 28, 2004, 2004, Defendant 100, who had been 4958 square meters of 4958 square meters for sale, filed for the registration of ownership transfer with the 00 district court’s 00 registry office (32590).

② Defendant 200, who was the same birth on the same day on the grounds of sale and purchase, filed for the registration of ownership transfer with the 00 district court 00 registry office 32591 on the same day.

③ Defendant 300, who is a child on the same day on the grounds of donation, has made a registration of ownership transfer with 00 district court 00 registry office 32592. (No. 2)

3. The doctor of the defaulted taxpayer's private will;

As the above transferred real estate was discovered from ○○○○○ City to be in violation of the Act on the Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder’s Name, the next transfer income tax shall be notified regarding the act of title trust transfer of the above transferred real estate, and in the event of failure to pay notified tax amount, a disposition for arrears, such as seizure, etc., on the property of the principal is anticipated, and the Defendants, who are related parties, have made the registration of title transfer of the real estate, which is one’s own property, to the Defendants, who transfer the ownership of the instant real estate to the Defendants in order to harm the national tax creditor who is the Plaintiff, and the Defendants, who are related parties to Nonparty 00,

4. Current property;

At the time of the fraudulent act, the non-party 00 owned (area; 12.12 square meters) 160.2 of shares among the 000-00-00 square meters of 110.4 square meters of ○○○-dong, Gyeonggi-do, ○○○-dong, 000, in addition to the real estate in question. At the time of the fraudulent act, the non-party 5,079,837 won appraised at the time of the fraudulent act or the seizure (amount in arrears: 310,260 won: 394,914,150,000 won: 1,589,380 won: 1,589,380 won): the non-party 00 won in excess of the debt amount, etc. at the time of

5. Bad faith of the defendant

Defendant 100 is the native of Nonparty 000, Defendant 200 is the birth of Nonparty 000, Defendant 300 is the father of Nonparty 000, Defendant 300 is the father of Nonparty 000, and Nonparty 00 did not have any other property except the real estate in this case. Therefore, at the time of transferring the ownership of the real estate in this case, the Defendants knew of the fact that this transfer of ownership was a fraudulent act, and that Nonparty 00 knew of the intention of Nonparty 00 (Evidence A 3).

6. The date on which he becomes aware of a fraudulent act;

The director of the tax office affiliated with the plaintiff was aware only of the fact that the real estate in this case was registered in the name of the defendant for the collection of delinquent taxes by the non-party 000.

7. Reinstatement; and

Defendant 1 offered the instant real property as security to 000 after acquiring the instant real property, and created a collateral with 00 registry No. 23089 as of September 29, 2005.

Therefore, even if it is intended to cancel the fraudulent act and to seek the cancellation of the registration of transfer due to restitution, it cannot be asserted against the subsequent purchaser in good faith, which is a bona fide purchaser, and it cannot be expected that the motive for the cancellation registration, as stated in the purport of the claim.

8. Conclusion

Therefore, in light of the above facts, the act of ownership transfer on the real estate between the non-party 000 and the defendants was known that the defendant knew of the fact that it would be exempted from the disposition of delinquent taxes due to the default of national taxes imposed by the director of the tax office. Accordingly, the plaintiff sought cancellation of the above sale and donation contract made by fraudulent act under Article 30 of the National Tax Collection Act and Article 406 of the Civil Act, and the plaintiff made a claim for restitution of ownership in the name of the non-party 000.