It constitutes a fraudulent act to conclude a contract for creation of collateral security with debt excess.

The conclusion of a contract to establish a mortgage in excess of a debt constitutes a fraudulent act with knowledge that it would result in the shortage of joint security and, unless there are special circumstances, reduce the joint security of general creditors, barring any special circumstance.

The contents of the decision shall be the same as attached.

1. The contract to establish a right to collateral security concluded on August 3, 2006 between the defendant and the non-party Kim ○ shall be revoked.

2. As to each real estate listed in the attached list to the Plaintiff, the Defendant shall execute the registration procedure rate for cancellation of the registration of the establishment of a mortgage near the area that was completed by the Busan District Court No. 28100, Aug. 4, 2006.

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

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. Plaintiff’s taxation claim

(1) From July 25, 2006 to September 5, 2006, the director of the Busan District Tax Office confirmed that the sales report was omitted after conducting a tax investigation on the non-party lapsing game room business from ○○○○○-1 to ○○○○○○ Gameland, and notified that the non-party 396,40,40 won of value-added tax for the year 2005 until October 31, 2006 and the amount of value-added tax for the second period from 2005 to 2,010,810,410 won for the second period from 2006 and the amount of value-added tax for 1,920,238,120 won for the first period from 206 to 30,000 each month.

(2) The Kim Yong- used filed a lawsuit seeking revocation of the imposition of each value-added tax as Busan District Court 2008Guhap1369, but was sentenced to a judgment dismissing the claim on July 16, 2008, which was dismissed on the ground that Kim Yong- used appealed (Seoul High Court 2008Nu3777) and appeal (Supreme Court 2009Du1204), but all of the appeals were dismissed.

(b) Disposal of property;

On August 3, 2006, Kim Yong-ran entered into a mortgage agreement on each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter referred to as "each real estate of this case") between the defendant and the defendant, who was the wife created by the non-party who was engaged in merchandise coupon sales business in the name of "○○ distribution from the same lot number as the above game room" (hereinafter referred to as "the mortgage agreement of this case"), and made a registration of establishment of a neighboring mortgage (hereinafter referred to as "registration of establishment of a neighboring mortgage of this case") on August 4, 2006 to the defendant on August 4, 2006.

C. The status of the property for Kim ○

“At the time of the instant mortgage contract, each of the instant real estate and the instant ○○○○-dong 17 ○○○○○○-17 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○,” 14.4 square meters on a 150.4 square meter on a 14.4 square meter on a 14.4 square meter on a 100 million maximum debt amount in the name of Nonparty ○○○ Savings Bank on each of the instant real estate, in addition to the instant tax liability, the secured debt secured by the establishment of mortgage over KRW 450 million on each of the instant real estate, and the secured debt secured by Nonparty 103 on the 103th floor of ○○○○○, Co., Ltd., Ltd., Ltd., with the maximum debt amount of KRW 480,000,000,000,000 won, which was the first 3rd 10,000,000 won on each of the instant real estate.

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

(a)the existence of preserved claims;

According to Article 21 (1) of the Framework Act on National Taxes, value-added tax is established when a taxable period ends. Thus, the Plaintiff’s taxation claim is deemed to have already occurred at the time of the instant mortgage contract which was concluded after the end of the taxable period, and thus, it may be the preserved right of obligee’s right ( even if the Plaintiff’s taxation claim was not established prior to the instant mortgage contract, there was a high probability as to the fact that the legal relationship which forms the basis of establishment of the claim has already been established at the time of the instant mortgage contract, and that the claim would have been created in the near future, and that there was a high probability that value-added tax was imposed in the near future on the imposition of value-added tax, and thus,

B. Establishment of fraudulent act

Therefore, barring any special circumstance, an obligor’s offering of real estate owned by him as security to any one of the obligees constitutes a fraudulent act in relation to other obligees, barring special circumstances. Thus, the conclusion of the instant mortgage contract by Kim ○-ran, who had already been in excess of the obligation, constitutes a fraudulent act with knowledge that it would cause a lack of common security and would reduce the common security of general creditors, barring special circumstances, and the Defendant’s history, which is the beneficiary, is presumed to have been malicious.

C. Defendant’s bona fide assertion

From May 23, 2005 to September 6, 2005, the Defendant granted a more interest than a bank, and lent KRW 640,000,000 to Kim ○ by designating and lending it as 0.8% or 0.5% per interest month, and received the interest. The Defendant asserted that Kim ○-ran was a bona fide beneficiary who did not expect the payment of the loan because he knew of the financial power operating the game room and did not receive a collateral, such as the establishment registration of mortgage, etc., due to the fact that Kim ○-ran's business was poor due to the regulation of the game room, and that this case's mortgage contract was concluded.

Therefore, as seen earlier, the creation of the right to collateral security is an exceptional case where: (a) the Defendant was engaged in merchandise coupon trading business attached thereto on the lot number, such as the speculative game room operated by Kim Yong-ran; (b) the Defendant was not provided with a loan certificate or any security while lending a large amount of money; and (c) the Defendant was paid in cash as alleged by the Defendant, if all the principal and interest were paid in cash, this is also an exceptional case; and (d) the Defendant was asserting that, at the time of the instant right to collateral security contract, he was aware of the fact that the business was poor due to the severe crackdown on Kim Il-ran Game at the time of the instant right to collateral security contract, and demanded the establishment of the right to collateral security because he could not be able to prohibit an uneasiness due to the massive enforcement report. In light of the above, it is difficult to believe that the entry of No. 9, the testimony created by the witness, the testimony created by the witness, and each entry of No. 2 through 8, and No. 10 (including numbers) are insufficient to acknowledge the testimony otherwise.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the mortgage contract of this case should be revoked as a fraudulent act, and the defendant is obligated to implement the procedure for registration of cancellation of the registration of the establishment of the mortgage of this case to the plaintiff as a result of restitution. Thus, the plaintiff's claim is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition.