the sole sale of real property and the excess of the debt constitutes a fraudulent act.

Unless there are other special circumstances, the sales contract of this case constitutes a fraudulent act detrimental to creditors, including the plaintiff, since the debtor sold the real estate of this case, which is the only real estate, to the defendant, who is the wife.

Article 30 of the National Tax Collection Act

1. The sales contract concluded on November 20, 2006 between ○○ decoration and the Defendant is revoked.

2. The defendant shall execute the procedure to cancel the registration of transfer of ownership, which was completed on December 1, 2006 by the receipt No. 44415, with respect to the real estate stated in the attached list to the head of the Busan District Court.

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

The same shall apply to the order.

A. From November 16, 2005 to November 16, 2006, ○○○○ Gameland operated a speculative game site under the trade name called “○○○○○○ Gameland”. In this regard, the head of a mid-term tax office affiliated with the Plaintiff did not file a value-added tax return for the second and the first half years of 2005, and the first half of 2006 from November 24, 2006 to December 20, 2006, after conducting on-site verification of taxation data against ○○ decoration, the head of a tax office affiliated with the Plaintiff notified 2nd year of March 31, 2005 to 1,058,071,090 won and 456,907,90 won of value-added tax for the second half years of 2005 to 1,006.

B. On November 20, 2006, the decoration entered into a sales contract with the Defendant, his wife, on the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”), which is the only real estate of the asset on November 20, 206, with the Defendant (hereinafter “instant sales contract”), and Busan District Court’s private registry office, which received on December 1, 2006, and transferred the registration of ownership transfer to another registry office, thereby exceeding the obligation.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 2, 3-1, 3-2.6, and 9; the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts, the Plaintiff’s claim for value-added tax on the Plaintiff’s decoration was established by operating the game room. Thus, the Plaintiff’s claim constitutes a preserved claim for obligee’s right of revocation, and the Defendant’s bad faith, a beneficiary, is presumed to be proven, barring any special circumstances, as the instant sales contract constitutes a fraudulent act detrimental to creditors including the Plaintiff, barring any other special circumstances. The time of the registration of transfer of the instant real estate was during the on-site verification period against the Plaintiff’s decoration, and the time of registration of transfer of the instant real estate was during the time of the on-site verification against the Plaintiff’s decoration.

나. 이에 대하여 피고는, 이모인 최○엽과 이모부인 장○훈에게 2,000만원을빌려주었다가 2006.11.경 사업자금이 급히 필요하여 이 사건 부동산을 처분하고자 한다는 장○훈의 제의로 2,500만원에 이 사건 부동산을 매수하면서 2ㅡ000만원은 대여금의 변제로 갈음하기로 하고 일단 이전등기를 받은 뒤, 나머지 500만원은 이 사건 부동산을 피고에게 인도할 때인 2007.9.10. 최○엽의 통장으로 송금하였으므로, 선의의 수익자에 해당한다고 주장하나, 을 1 내지 13호증의 각 기재, 증인 최○엽의 증언만으로는 피고의 선의를 인정하기에 부족하고 달리 이를 인정할 만한 증거가 없으므로 피고의 주장은 이유 없다.

C. Therefore, since the instant sales contract between the decoration and the Defendant is a fraudulent act, it is revoked, and the Defendant is obligated to implement the registration procedure for cancellation of ownership transfer registration of the instant real estate to the decoration.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is accepted on the ground of the reasons.