The agreement on division of inherited property can be subject to the exercise of the right to revoke the fraudulent act.

The agreement on division of inherited property is to confirm the reversion of inherited property by holding all or part of the property owned by each inheritor independently or by performing it as a new co-ownership system with respect to the property owned by co-inheritors after the inheritance commences, and therefore, it is a juristic act with the property right purpose. Therefore, it can be the subject of the exercise of the right to revoke fraudulent act.

Article 35 of the National Tax Collection Act (hereinafter "National Tax Collection Act") shall have effect on the provisional attachment or disposal property.

Seoul Central District Court 2016Kadan5272871 Revocation of Fraudulent Act

Korea

KimOO and 3

January 23, 2018

February 20, 2018

1. At least 1/6 of the land specified in paragraph (1) of the attached Table between AA and Defendant EE;

then the Agreement on Division of Inherited Property concluded on December 9, 2013 is revoked within the scope of X,x,xx members.

Defendant EE, on the day following the day this decision became final and conclusive for the Plaintiff, xx,xx, and the Plaintiff.

The rate of 5% per annum shall be paid from the day of full payment to the day of full payment.

2. As to one-six percent of each land listed in the separate sheet No. 2

(a) AA and Defendant BB, and CCC on December 9, 2013;

cancellation of the purposes of this section;

B. Defendant BB and CCC shall transfer ownership registration based on the restoration of the true title to AA.

Implementation of the Procedure;

C. Defendant DD on May 27, 2014 to Defendant BB and CCC’s District Court Macheon Registry.

the cancellation of the provisional registration of the right to claim the full transfer of shares completed in accordance with section 19543 or 19544

D. D. D.

3. The plaintiff's remaining claims against defendant BB, CCC, and DD are dismissed.

4. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Defendants.

Cheong-gu Office

1. Judgment identical with the main sentence of paragraph (1);

2. As to one-six percent of each land listed in the separate sheet No. 2

(a) enter into an agreement on division of inherited property concluded on December 9, 2013 between AA and Defendant BB;

Defendant BB shall file a claim for the transfer of ownership due to the restoration of the true title with AA.

Implementation of the Procedure;

B. AA and Defendant CCC enter into an agreement on division of inherited property concluded on December 9, 2013

Defendant CCC shall file a claim with AA for ownership transfer registration due to the restoration of the true name.

FUD;

C. Defendant DDR

1) Defendant BB’s District Court Macheon Registry on May 27, 2014 received No. 19543 on May 27, 2014

The registration of the right to claim transfer of the completed share

2) Defendant CCC received on May 27, 2014, receipt No. 195444 from the District Court Macheon District Court’s Macheon Registry

The registration of the right to claim transfer of the completed share

Each cancellation registration procedure shall be implemented.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff’s global income tax for AA as the time when the year 2002 reverts, and 2, 2002:

National tax claims of value-added tax at the time of equipment, as of December 7, 2017.

The amount ofx,x,x,xx.

(b) AA is FF's son, and FF's son who died on July 15, 2013, and is a fF's cream.

Co-ownership in proportion to 1/6 each, together with oil, BB, CCC, GG, HH

The co-inheritors inherited the land indicated in paragraph (1) of the Attached List No. 1 on December 9, 2013, as Defendant AA’s sole ownership, and each land listed in paragraph (2) of the Attached List No. 2 as Defendant BB, CCC, and GG.

an agreement on division of inherited property under the joint ownership of the property was concluded, and the subsequent list No. 2

The share of each land described in the paragraph is 3/6 of the defendant BB, 2/6 of the defendant CCC, and HH is 1/6.

C. Afterward, each land listed in paragraph 2 of the Annex AA is attributable to Defendant DD, who is an infant of the AA, and Defendant BB, to Defendant BB, on May 27, 2014, due to the purchase and sale reservation made on May 19, 2014

(2) On May 19, 2014, Defendant CCC made a provisional registration; and Defendant CCC made a pre-sale promise on May 19, 2014, in shares of 2/6.

The provisional registration based on the cause was completed as described in Section 2(c) of the Disposition.

D. At the time of the agreement on the division of the above inherited property, AA had no assets and was in excess of its obligation.

E. Meanwhile, on June 13, 2014, Defendant EEE indicated in attached Table 1 to Yellow Hack on June 13, 2014

X,xx,xx andxx members, which was sold on June 24, 2014, transferred the registration of ownership transfer pursuant to it.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Entry of Evidence A 1 to 8, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. Establishment of fraudulent act

AA’s waiver of 1/6 of each of the lands listed in the separate sheet in the status of excess of the obligation of AA.

Any act of entering into an agreement on division of property shall cause the lack of joint security of all general creditors; and

Defendant EE, who is a beneficiary, is aware that it would prejudice the Plaintiff, thereby constituting a fraudulent act.

BB, CCC, and Defendant DD, a subsequent purchaser, constitute a fraudulent act by the agreement on division of inherited property.

It is presumed that he had known that he had known that he had known.

EE, CCC did not know that the agreement on the division of inherited property would have impaired the Plaintiff’s breach of trust.

Although it is alleged that the above Defendants were bona fide beneficiaries only with the evidence Nos. 1 through 5.

Since the argument is insufficient to do so, it cannot be accepted.

B. Compensation for the value of Defendant EE;

As seen earlier, Defendant EE, a beneficiary, sold the land indicated in Section 1 of the attached Table to the bona fide third person and completed the registration of ownership transfer thereafter, and thus, the land is returned to the original owner.

It should be restored according to the method of return due to impossibility of compensation.On the other hand, xxx, xxx at the price of the land listed in attached Table 1 as the purchase price by III until the time of closing of argument.

subsection (b) of this section.

Therefore, 1/6 of the land specified in attached Table 1 between AA and Defendant EE

The Agreement on Division of Inherited Property, concluded with respect to which the value thereof is the x,x,x,xx (=x,x,x,xx) x x x x x/1/6)

Defendant EE shall be revoked within the scope of this section, and Defendant EE shall be liable to the Plaintiff for the equivalent value, Xx,xx andx.

The rate of 5% per annum prescribed by the Civil Act from the day after this judgment becomes final and conclusive to the day of full payment.

shall pay damages for delay calculated.

C. Return of originals of Defendant BB, CCC, and DD

With respect to 1/6 of each land listed in paragraph (2) of the attached Table, AA and Defendant BB, Kim

The Agreement on Division of Inherited Property concluded on December 9, 2013 between the United States and the United States shall be revoked, and complying therewith.

due to such restitution, Defendant BB and CCC shall own the property to AA on the ground that the property has been restored to its true name.

Defendant DDR, the subsequent purchaser, shall also be restored to its original state; and

(B) received on May 27, 2014 from Defendants BB and CCC, the District Court Macheon Registry of the District Court

The procedure for cancellation registration must be implemented when the right to claim the transfer of all shares completed in 19543 and 19544 is revoked.

D. As to the remaining claims of the plaintiff

The Plaintiff, as to Defendant BB and CCC, 1/6 of each land listed in the separate sheet No. 2

Ownership due to the cancellation of an agreement on division of inherited property with respect to shares and the restoration of authentic title;

Defendant BB and CCC respectively filed a claim for pre-registration and filed each objection against Defendant DDR

A separate claim shall be made for the cancellation of provisional registration of one-sixth share.

However, the part which is revoked by fraudulent act and restored to its original state among each land listed in attached Table 2

The plaintiff's assertion that is 1/6 of the shares of AA, and the part claimed by the plaintiff is equivalent to 2/6 of the shares, so it cannot be recognized as it is, and it goes beyond the above part.

We cannot accept it.

3. Conclusion

The plaintiff's claim against defendant EE is justified, and the defendant BB, CCC, and DD are accepted.

A claim against A is justified only for the part recognized above, and the remainder shall be accepted.

Therefore, it shall be dismissed as per Disposition. It is so decided as per Disposition.