Ulsan District Court 2012 Gohap989 (2013.05.01)

The creditor's right of revocation includes additional charges and increased additional charges.

The additional and increased additional charges provided for by the National Tax Collection Act are naturally generated if national taxes are not paid by the due date without a fixed procedure by the person who has the authority to impose taxes, and the amount of capital gains tax is also determined, so as to be recognized as preserved bonds by the obligee's right to revoke the transfer income tax, the amount of such transfer income

2013Na50879 Revocation of Fraudulent Act

- Appellants

Korea

1. Persons taking charge of the actions of the deceased highA;

(a) KimB B. KimCC Da. KimD

In addition, the person taking charge of the action of the deceased highA, the appellant, or the appellant

2. KimE;

3. HighF; and

Ulsan District Court Decision 2012Gahap989 Decided May 1, 2013

November 21, 2013

December 5, 2013

1. The Plaintiff’s appeal against Defendant GoF and the appeal against Defendant KimB, KimCC, KimD, and KimE are all dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by each party.

3. According to the process of litigation of Defendant KimB, KimCC, KimDD, and KimE, the part of the judgment of the first instance against the deceased in the judgment was modified as follows.

A. The agreement on the donation between the deceased high-levelA and the GoG on January 9, 2008 and the agreement on the donation of the OOO on February 29, 2008 shall be revoked, respectively.

B. As to the Plaintiff, Defendant KimB, KimCC, and KimD, each OOOO, Defendant KimE shall pay 5% interest per annum from the day following the day this judgment became final to the day of complete payment.

1. Purport of claim

The judgment of the court below is revoked on February 29, 2008 between the plaintiff and the defendant KimE and GoGG, and the contract of donation of OOOOOOOOOOOOO directors on March 3, 2008, and the contract of donation of OOOOOO directors on October 21, 2008 between the defendant KimB, KimCC, KimD, and KimE's lawsuit acceptance at the court of appeal. The defendant KimE shall revoke the contract of donation of OOOO directors to the plaintiff within the limit of OOO directors. The defendant KimE shall pay the plaintiff with 5% interest per annum from the day following the day when the judgment becomes final to the day when the payment is complete. The decision of the court below is revoked on July 15, 2008 between the defendant GoF and GoG, that is calculated on July 15, 2008 by the day after the day after the judgment becomes final to the day after the full payment is complete.

2. Purport of appeal

A. The plaintiff

Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against Defendant High F is revoked. It is so decided as to the purport of the claim.

B. Defendant KimB, KimCC, KimD, and KimE

The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the above Defendants is revoked, and all of the plaintiff's claims against the above Defendants are dismissed.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasons for this Court's decision for this case are as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance except for the revision of some of the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance as follows, and thus, they are cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act (the plaintiff and the defendant KimB, KimB, KimCC, KimDD, and KimE basically repeats the same arguments in the court of first instance even in the trial. In light of the allegations and the reasons why the plaintiff and the above defendants have partially supplemented, the judgment of the court of first instance is justifiable even if considering the arguments and the reasons why the plaintiff and the above defendants have partially supplemented, Gap evidence Nos. 11, 12 and

2. Parts to be corrected;

(a) Parts A.1 of "1. Basic Facts" in the judgment of the court of first instance shall be written as follows:

[1] Around January 2008, GoG sold 50,000 shares of HH Industry Co., Ltd. to the II Industrial Co., Ltd., and on September 1, 2008, it voluntarily reported and paid the capital gains tax OOO on September 1, 2008.

(b)Paragraph (b) of "1. Basic Facts" in the judgment of the first instance shall add paragraph (c) below:

“On the other hand, the Defendant Kim E-E and his her husband, KimB, KimCC, and KimD taken over the legal proceedings on August 19, 2013, following the death of August 19, 2013 during which the trial was pending in the trial.”

(c) Forms 9 and 12 of the first instance judgment shall be followed by the following:

“Therefore, the agreement between the network high-levelA and high-levelA and the donation agreement between the OOOOOO on January 9, 2008 and the OOOOOOOOOO on February 29, 2008 has been revoked, and the deceased high-levelA heir is the plaintiff, and the defendant KimE is the heir of the deceased OOOO (=OOO x 3/9, and less than 10 won). The defendant KimE is each OOOOO (=OOO x less than 2/9, and less than 10 won) and the defendant KimB, KimB, KimCC, and KimD is obligated to pay the amount calculated at the rate of 5% per annum as provided by the Civil Act, upon the plaintiff's request, from the day following the day this judgment became final to the day of full payment;

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant KimB, KimCC, KimDD, and KimE shall be accepted in its reasoning, and the claim against the defendant GoF shall be dismissed due to the lack of reason. The judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion, and the plaintiff's appeal against the defendant GoF and the appeal against the defendant KimB, KimB, KimCC, KimD, and KimE shall be all dismissed, but the part of the judgment of the court of first instance as to the deceased GoA among the judgment of the court of first instance shall be modified according to the succession of the deceased GoA's litigant's litigant's litigant.