(심리불속행) 이 사건 주식의 명의신탁에 경영권을 방어하기 위한 목적이 있었다고 보기 어렵고, 조세회피의 의도도 있었다고 인정됨[국승]
Seoul High Court-2016-Nu-60145 ( October 17, 2016)
(C) It is difficult to see that there was an intention to defend the right of management in the title trust of the instant shares, and that there was an intention of tax avoidance.
(Summary) It is difficult to view that there was a purpose to defend the management right of the instant company at the time of the title trust of the instant shares, and even if there was a purpose to defend the management right of the instant company, it cannot be said that there was no intent of tax avoidance, and thus, there was no intention of tax avoidance
Article 45-2 of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.
All of the records of this case and the judgment of the court below and the grounds of appeal were examined, but it is clear that the appellant's ground of appeal falls under Article 4 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Trial Procedure, and it is therefore dismissed pursuant to Article 5 of the same Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.