the contract shall constitute a fraudulent act.

Since the gift contract of this case constitutes a fraudulent act and the delinquent taxpayer was aware of it, the contract of this case should be revoked.

2014Ba63604 Revocation of Fraudulent Act

Korea

IsaA

August 12, 2015

September 23, 2015

1. The contract of donation concluded on June 24, 2014 between the defendant and the non-party high-B regarding the real estate stated in the separate sheet shall be revoked.

2. The defendant will implement the procedure for the registration of ownership transfer on the real estate listed in the separate sheet to the non-party high-B.

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

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. Facts of recognition

1) On June 30, 2014, the head of the ○○○○ Tax Office, under the Plaintiff’s control, determined and notified that the Plaintiff would receive bonus income accrued in the year 2011 (hereinafter “the instant disposition of income”) and additionally pay the global income tax amounting to KRW 59,374,040.

2) On June 24, 2014, highB entered into a donation agreement with the Defendant, the wife, and the Defendant, as indicated in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant donation agreement”) to donate real estate (hereinafter “the instant real estate”). On the same day, the highB completed the registration of ownership transfer on the instant real estate in the future of the Defendant on the same day.

On the same day, the Defendant completed the registration of creation of a mortgage on the instant real estate with the maximum debt amount of KRW 7,200,000, the debtor, the debtor, the mortgagee of the right to collateral security, and the mortgagee of the right to collateral security.

3) HighB was in excess of obligations at the time of the instant gift agreement.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence No. 1-6, the purport of the whole pleadings

B. Determination

1) The instant donation contract constitutes a fraudulent act, and the highB may be deemed to have been aware of it.

2) The instant donation contract shall be revoked, and the Defendant is obligated to implement the registration procedure for ownership transfer on the instant real estate due to the restoration of real name to the original state to the HighB.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The defendant's assertion

1) In light of the fact that high-B is only a representative director in the form of large ○○○○○○○○, etc., the instant disposition of income is unlawful and there is no obligation to pay global income tax accordingly (i).

2) The Defendant did not know that the instant donation contract would prejudice the obligee (B).

B. Determination

1) As to (1) Claim

As long as a taxation disposition cannot be deemed null and void as a matter of course, even if there exists an unlawful ground for revocation of the taxation disposition, such taxation disposition shall be valid until it is lawfully revoked by the fairness and executory power of the administrative act. Therefore, the validity of such taxation in civil procedure cannot be denied (see Supreme Court Decision 9Da20179, Aug. 20, 199).

There is no evidence to acknowledge that the disposition of this case’s income is null and void as a matter of course. Even if the disposition of this case’s income is unlawful, it is valid until it is lawfully revoked, and thus, the defendant’s recommendation is without merit.

(2) As to the claim

There is no evidence to acknowledge that the Defendant did not know that the instant donation contract would prejudice the obligee.

3. Conclusion

The plaintiff's claim is justified and accepted.