by a delinquent taxpayer who donated his/her current real estate to his/her birth constitutes a fraudulent act.

It is necessary to cancel the registration of transfer of ownership by fraudulent act, to cancel the gift contract and the registration of transfer of ownership by the delinquent taxpayer who intends to evade the disposition on default.

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

2016 Ghana 20162 Revocation of Fraudulent Act

Korea

KimA

Pleadings without Oral Proceedings

on March 30, 2016

1. As to real estate listed in the separate sheet:

A. Revocation of a gift agreement concluded on August 5, 2015 between the Defendant and KimB, and

B. On August 27, 2015, the Defendant shall implement the procedure for the registration of cancellation of ownership transfer registration, which was completed by the receipt No. 00000 on August 27, 2015, to the Cheongju District Court Cheong

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

Cheong-gu Office

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Indication of claims: It shall be as shown in attached Form; and

2. Applicable provisions of Acts: Judgment without pleadings (Articles 208 (3) 1 and 257 of the Civil Procedure Act);

[Attachment]

Cheongwon of the Gu

1. Status between parties;

The plaintiff has a tax claim of KRW 000,000,000 against the non-party in arrears KimB (hereinafter referred to as "GlaB"), and the defendant has the honor of KimB (No. 1 and No. 2).

2. Establishment of taxable circumstances and preserved claims;

(a) Details of taxation;

The director of the Songpa District Tax Office under the Plaintiff notified the transfer income tax of KRW 00,000,000 for the year 2008, however, KimokB did not pay it until now, and there is the amount in arrears of KRW 00,000 as of the date of the lawsuit, and the increased additional charges are continuously imposed. The details are as shown below [Attachment 1] (Evidence 1).

[Attachment 1] The amount of national taxes in arrears as of the filing date of KimB's lawsuit

(unit: Won)

Jurisdiction Form

Items of Taxation

Deadline for payment

Amount in arrears

Time of Reversion

Date of establishment of tax liability;

Transmitt.

Transfer Income Tax

December 31, 2010

00,000,000

208

December 31, 2008

Total delinquent amount

00,000,000

B. Establishment of preserved claims

As seen above, the preservation claim against KimB is KRW 000,000,000, as seen in the [Attachment 1], and the date on which the obligation to pay national taxes has already been established prior to the date of fraudulent act ( August 5, 2015), and the legal relationship that is already required to impose the tax collection of taxes has already been formed prior to the date of fraudulent act. Therefore, there is no defect that the national tax in this case becomes the preserved claim.

3. Fraudulent act;

(a) Real estate donation contract;

KimB donated to the defendant on August 5, 2015 and completed the registration of ownership transfer of real estate on the attached list (hereinafter referred to as "the real estate of this case") without fulfilling the obligation to pay the capital gains tax notified (Evidence A 3).

B. Active and negative property of KimB at the time of the fraudulent act

KimB had positive property and negative property as shown in Table 2 at the time of the fraudulent act ( August 5, 2015) (Evidence 4) (Evidence 4).

[Attachment 2] Potable and Small Property at the time of fraudulent act

(unit: Won)

Active Property

Petty Property

Details

Values

Method of Assessment

Details

Values

Method of Assessment

The real estate of this case

0,000,000

officially announced value

Tax Liabilities

00,000,000

Tax Liabilities

(c) Occurrence of excess of liability due to the gift contract;

At the time KimB donated the instant real estate to the Defendant, as seen in Table 2, KimB’s active property is KRW 0,00,000, while the positive property of the KimB was in excess of KRW 00,000,000, and the negative property was in excess of KRW 00,000,00, and on August 5, 2015, the gift of the instant real estate to the Defendant, one’s own partner, reduced the liability property of KRW 0,000,000, which corresponds to the value of the instant real estate, thereby increasing the debt to prevent the Plaintiff from meeting the Plaintiff’s tax claim.

D. Sub-determination

KimB predicted that the disposition for arrears, such as seizure of the real estate owned by himself, will be carried out under the taxation of capital gains tax, and donated the real estate in this case to the defendant, who is his birth, on August 5, 2015, which caused the situation where the plaintiff's taxation claims cannot be satisfied. Thus, this is the case of fraudulent act.

4. The intention of an injury.

KimB had the duty to pay the transfer income tax, but did not pay it, completed the registration of ownership transfer of this case's real estate by donation to the defendant who is his own partner, and KimB should be viewed as the fact that the plaintiff notified the transfer income tax but did not pay the tax, and thus, KimB should be deemed as having the intention to harm the plaintiff, who is a tax claim at the

5. Bad faith presumption of the defendant

The defendant should be deemed to have known the fact that such donation was a fraudulent act at the time of transfer of ownership of the real estate in this case due to the birth of KimB, and that the defendant should prove that there was a good faith in relation to the fraudulent act.

6. Period of exclusion;

On December 17, 2015, which became aware of the fraudulent act of this case after the disposition of the amount in arrears of KimB was deferred, and thereafter came to know in the course of perusal of computerized data, etc. on the delinquent taxpayer's property, and one year has not passed from August 5, 2015, which was the date of the fraudulent act, it would be legitimate to file a lawsuit.

7. Conclusion

In light of the above facts, KimB's act of acquiring the ownership of the real estate in this case to the defendant who is the birth of the plaintiff constitutes a fraudulent act, and the defendant also knew such facts. Therefore, the plaintiff revoked the donation contract concluded between KimB and the defendant regarding the real estate in the separate sheet, such as the purport of the claim, and sought cancellation of the ownership transfer registration for the real estate in the separate sheet by seeking cancellation of the ownership transfer registration for the real estate in the method of restitution for fraudulent act due to revocation of the fraudulent act, thereby resulting in the claim for the national tax

[Attachment]

List

1. [Land]

00 square meters prior to 000 m200 m200 square meters in the voice of the Cheongbuk-do;

00/00 of the shares of KimA 00

2. [Land]

00 square meters prior to 000 m200 m200 square meters in the voice of the Cheongbuk-do;

00/00 of the shares of KimA 00

3. [Land]

00 square meters prior to 000 m200 m200 square meters in the voice of the Cheongbuk-do;

00/00 of the shares of KimA 00