[증여세등부과처분취소][공1985.9.15.(760),1210]
In case where the registration of a third party title is null and void, whether the provisions of Article 32-2 of the Inheritance Tax Act shall apply (negative)
Where a registration made in the name of a third party, not the actual owner of a real estate, is made for the invalidation of the cause, the provisions of Article 32-2 of the Inheritance Tax Act that if the actual owner of the real estate and the registrant are different, it shall be deemed that the actual owner have donated it to
Article 32-2 of the Inheritance Tax Act
Plaintiff 1 et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant
Head of Ulsan District Office
Daegu High Court Decision 84Gu381 delivered on March 22, 1985
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.
The grounds of appeal are examined.
The court below determined that the registration under the name of the plaintiffs on the land of this case is invalid because it is against the Farmland Reform Act, not the actual owner of the land of this case. As such, in case where the registration under the name of a third party, which is not the real owner of the real estate, is invalid, if the real owner of the real estate and the registration titleholder are different, the provisions of Article 32-2 of the Inheritance Tax Act that the real owner of the real estate shall be deemed to have donated to the nominal owner cannot be applied. Thus, the actual owner cannot be deemed to have donated the real estate to the registration titleholder only by the invalidation of the cause.
In the same purport, the court below is just in holding that the real owner of the real estate of this case cannot be deemed to have donated the real estate of this case to the plaintiffs by only registration in the name of the plaintiffs, which is null and void in the ground of appeal, and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to Article 32-2
Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.
Justices Kang Jin-young (Presiding Justice)