2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. The so-called ○○ Global Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the “○○ Global”) which is a specialized company for corporate restructuring was established on November 29, 2001. At the time of its establishment, the Plaintiff was registered in the register of shareholders as holding 150,000 shares (the total amount of shares 75,000 won; hereinafter referred to as the “instant shares”) out of 600,000 shares with face value of 50,000 won.

B. On January 5, 2005, the Defendant deemed that the actual owner of the instant shares was Kim○○, and that he was a title trust to the Plaintiff, and applied Article 41-2(1) of the former Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act (amended by Act No. 6780, Dec. 18, 2002; hereinafter referred to as the “former Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act”), Kim○ shall be deemed to have donated the instant shares to the Plaintiff, and the issue price of KRW 75 million shall be deemed to have been donated to the Plaintiff, and the Defendant decided and notified that KRW 10,500,000, including penalty tax for a return and an unfaithful payment to the Plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as the “instant disposition”).

C. The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition, and filed an objection against the Defendant on April 13, 2005, and the Defendant dismissed the objection, and the Defendant filed a request for examination with the National Tax Service on August 16, 2005, but the request for examination was dismissed on November 21, 2005.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, Eul evidence 2, one to three evidence 2, and the purport of the premise of pleading.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

With the introduction of Park○-○, the Plaintiff acquired the instant shares from Kim○, a real owner of the ○○ Global, while taking office as a director of the ○○○○ Global. On the other hand, the Plaintiff agreed to pay the instant shares on a performance-based basis if the Plaintiff was recognized as having contributed to the development of the ○○ Global in the future. However, while transferring the instant shares to Kim○-○, the Plaintiff agreed to offset the price of shares by the loans on the payment of shares to an individual to the ○○ representative director Kim○-○ (the wife of the ○○○○○○○) of the ○ Global, while taking office as a director of the ○○○○ Global. Accordingly, the instant disposition based on the premise that a title trust was made is unlawful as the Plaintiff actually received the instant shares from Kim○-○, and thus, was unlawful.

(b) Related statutes;

[former Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act (amended by Act No. 6780 of Dec. 18, 2002)

Article 41-2 (Presumption of Donation of Title Trust Property)

(1) Where the actual owner is different from his/her nominal owner in property (excluding land and buildings; hereafter the same shall apply in this Article), the value of the relevant property shall be deemed donated by the actual owner on the date when the actual owner registers, etc. as the nominal owner, notwithstanding Article 14 of the Framework Act on National Taxes: Provided, That this shall not apply to cases falling under any of the following subparagraphs:

1. Where assets are registered, etc. in the name of another person without the purpose of tax avoidance;

2. Where converting the name of the actual owner into the name of a third party during the period until December 31, 1998 (hereafter referred to as "suspension period" in this Article) for the stocks, etc. entered in the register of stockholders or the register of members in the name of a third party or the transfer of ownership pursuant to a trust or agreement made before January 1, 1997 among the stocks or equity shares (hereafter referred to as "stocks, etc." in this Article): Provided, That this shall not apply where converting the name of the person in a special relationship with the stockholders (including investors) of the corporation which issued the relevant stocks, etc. or of the person who is a minor as of

(2) Where property is registered, etc. in the name of another person and the name of stocks, etc. is not converted into the name of the actual owner during the grace period under paragraph (1) 2, it shall be presumed that there exists a purpose

(c) Fact of recognition;

(1) On November 29, 2001, 2001, Kim○-○ established and operated a specialized restructuring company from Park○-○○, and the person who established and operated the specialized restructuring company was offered funds by Kim○-○ and his wife Kim○-○, and agreed to establish the company by providing know-how with respect to the management of the company. On November 29, 2001, Kim○-○ established the ○○ Global, and Kim○-○, a representative director, Park○-○, and an auditor, respectively.

(2) The ○○ couple borrowed the amount of KRW 3 billion from the bondholder with the establishment fund of the ○○ Global, and all of the shares paid thereafter were withdrawn and returned to the bondholder, and the account book of the ○○ Global was disposed of as loans to the representative director Kim○○ individual.

(3) However, at the time of establishment of ○○ Global, the register of shareholders is registered as holding shares by other persons, including the Plaintiff as listed below.

Name

Number of Stocks

Par value

Total amount of share

Ratio of Shares

○ Kim

48 million shares

500 won

2,400,000,000

80%

Park ○

300 thousand shares

500 won

150,000,000 won

5%

○ Kim

300 thousand shares

500 won

150,000,000 won

5%

○○ Kim (Plaintiff)

150,000 shares

500 won

75,000,000 won

2.5% by mass

Gangwon ○

150,000 shares

500 won

75,000,000 won

2.5% by mass

Hyo

150,000 shares

500 won

75,000,000 won

2.5% by mass

Park ○

150,000 shares

500 won

75,000,000 won

2.5% by mass

Total

6 million0 million shares

3,000,000,000

100%

(4) On the other hand, on December 3, 2001, the plaintiff requested 25/1,000 of shares to participate as ○○ Global Shareholders and Promoters, and then prepared a certificate of confirmation (Evidence A 2) to the effect that it is confirmed that the payment of shares or a considerable amount of business performance, and that it is recognized at the time of achievement of business performance.

(5) On September 2, 2002, the husband and wife of ○○○ transferred 510,000 shares of ○○ Global Shares under his name to Kim○○, etc. Around that time, all remaining shares of 90,000 shares, which were registered in the name of the Plaintiff, etc., were transferred to Kim○, but the Plaintiff did not receive the transfer price of the shares from Kim○○.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 2, 3, 5 evidence, Eul 2-1 to 3, Eul 4 evidence, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

D. Determination

The following facts revealed: (a) the couple of ○○○○ couple established the ○○○○ Global and prepared the price for all shares of 3 billion won necessary for the establishment of the ○○○○ Global Issuance by borrowing all of the shares from the bonds company to establish the company; (b) in the process, the account books process that the ○○ Global treats all the shares as loans to individuals by the representative director; (c) there was no interest agreement between the ○○ Global and the Plaintiff, or between the ○○○ couple and the Plaintiff; and (d) there was no evidence as to whether to pay the shares; and (e) there was no fact that the 5.1 million share shares, which were in the name of the ○○ couple, were transferred to the ○○○○○○○○○○○○, but there was no fact that the Plaintiff received the transfer price for the shares (i.e., the 3th certificate, and the statement on transfer and acquisition of shares). However, it appears that the Plaintiff did not have any special reason to acknowledge the transfer of shares under the name of ○○○○○○’s shareholder.

[B] According to Article 41-2(1) of the former Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act, in case where a person who is actual owner and title holder are different from the shares in this case, the value of the property shall be deemed to have been donated to the actual owner on the day on which the register of shareholders is entered in the title holder, notwithstanding Article 14 (Real Taxation) of the Framework Act on National Taxes. Therefore, even if there is room for the Plaintiff to be recognized as having contributed to the said shares held in title, as alleged by the

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case seeking revocation on the premise that the disposition of this case is unlawful is dismissed without any appearance or reasons. It is so decided as per Disposition.