In the absence of any other property, the gift to the defendant constitutes a fraudulent act and the defendant's bad faith is presumed.

In a situation where tax liability is liable, and there is no particular property, since the gift of this case was made to the defendant and the above gift was omitted in excess of liability, it constitutes a fraudulent act, and since the defendant's bad faith is presumed to be a beneficiary, the above gift contract shall be revoked as a fraudulent act, and the defendant has the obligation to implement the procedure for registration cancellation

Article 30 of the National Tax Collection Act

2011Aband 58714 Revocation of Fraudulent Act

Korea

xx

March 20, 2012

April 10, 2012

1. The contract of donation concluded on February 24, 201 between the defendant and the non-party A with respect to each real estate listed in the separate sheet shall be revoked.

2. The Defendant shall implement the procedure for registration of cancellation of ownership transfer registration completed on February 25, 201 by the receipt No. 2127 of the transfer of ownership, as to each real estate listed in the separate sheet attached to the Plaintiff.

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

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Facts of recognition;

The following facts were either in dispute between the parties or in each entry in Gap evidence Nos. 1 to 5, by integrating the purpose of the entire pleadings.

A. On November 1, 2010, the director of the Korea Tax Office under his/her control notified tinA of the payment deadline on or before December 8, 2010, for the following tax claims by the Plaintiff to the Nonparty A.

B. Meanwhile, on February 24, 201, tinA entered into a contract with the Defendant, who was notified as above, to donate each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “each real estate of this case”) to the Defendant, and completed the registration of transfer of ownership recorded in the separate sheet to the Defendant. However, tinA had no specific property other than the real estate of this case at the time of the donation, and was liable to pay taxes as above.

2. Determination on the grounds for the revocation of a fraudulent act

tinA is liable for tax payment as above to the Plaintiff, and in the absence of any specific property, since the gift of each of the instant real estate was given to the Defendant and omitted in the status of debts, such gift constitutes a fraudulent act. In addition, in full view of the fact that tinA has given the instant real estate to the Defendant since no longer passed after the notice was received by tinA as above, and that tinA’s father is his father, it may be recognized that tinA had an intention of harm at the time of the donation, and that the Defendant’s bad faith is presumed to have been presumed to have been presumed to have been the beneficiary. Accordingly, the said gift contract concluded between the Defendant and tinA should be revoked as a fraudulent act, and the Defendant has an obligation

3. The defendant's assertion and judgment

Although the defendant asserts to the effect that there was no intention of deception, there is no evidence to acknowledge it, and the defendant's legal representative is recognized as tinA, so the defendant's argument shall not be accepted.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable, and it is decided as per Disposition by admitting it.