As ○○○○ died on February 11, 1991, the Plaintiffs, who were co-inheritors, received the same assets as indicated in the column for reporting the tax base of the deceased on August 5, 1991, and filed a voluntary report on inheritance tax. On April 2, 1993, the Defendant calculated the total amount of KRW 3,536,174,226 of the above reported assets by correcting the value of the land and the building portion to KRW 3,641,53,868; on May 9, 1990, 000 ○○○○○○○ 6, 454.200, 706, 706, 706, 700, 700, 706, 700, 196, 306, 300, 45, 196, 306, 60, 190.

2. The plaintiffs' assertion and judgment

A. Part of denial of inheritance obligation;

On May 30, 1990, Nonparty 82,00,000 and September 10, 1990, Nonparty 117,000,000 won in total from Nonparty ○○○○, and the above debt was inherited to the Plaintiffs because he did not pay it in full, and the Defendant did not recognize it as an inheritance obligation. Thus, the Defendant asserted that the instant taxation disposition was unlawful. Thus, it cannot be believed in light of the Plaintiff’s statement of No. 7-1,2, No. 8-1, and No. 8-2, each of the above alleged facts, and partial testimony of ○○○○ witness’s testimony, which is consistent with No. 5, and there is no evidence to deem otherwise, that the above amount was the next ○○○ from the above Nonparty before Nonparty ○○ died. Therefore, this part of the Plaintiffs’ assertion is groundless.

(b) Part on the arrangement of cash inheritance;

Then, the plaintiffs asserted that the non-party deceased's total amount of KRW 157,00,00,000, 355,000,000, and 258,130,000,000,000,000,00 bonds borrowed from bonds as above, before the deceased's life, used ○○○○ Construction Costs, vehicle purchase costs, children's education expenses, nursing expenses, and other living expenses, and thus, the plaintiffs did not have succeeded to 269,727,044, which is part of the above money (48,00,000), the construction expenses (140,350,70,700,000, and 258,130,130,1300,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00,00,000,00,000.

The evidence No. 10 to No. 400, No. 50, No. 206, No. 10, No. 30, No. 40, No. 10, and No. 2, No. 40, No. 15, No. 2, and No. 10, No. 30, No. 40, No. 2, No. 9, and No. 1, No. 40, No. 7, No. 40, No. 9, No. 1, and No. 2, No. 9, No. 1, and No. 2, No. 9, No. 1, and No. 4, No. 70, No. 1, and No. 2, No. 30, No. 1, and No. 9, No. 4, and No. 9, No. 70, No.

In regard to this, the defendant, while determining the taxable value of the inherited property of this case, calculated the value of ○○○○○ as KRW 140,350,704 based on the standard market price, which is a supplementary assessment method, and added the same amount to the tax base, and recognized the same amount as the construction cost of the above ○○○○○○○○. If the plaintiffs asserted that the construction cost is more than the above amount recognized by the defendant, the defendant, who is the inherited property, should calculate the inheritance tax amount with the value of 345,043,950 won, which is the appraised value at the time of July 7, 1993. However, the appraisal value of ○○○○○○○○’s certificate as of July 7, 1991 cannot be deemed as the market value of the inherited property at the time of the commencement of the inheritance of this case, and even if the construction cost above the standard market price was actually recognized, there is no evidence to acknowledge it as the market value at the time of the commencement of the inheritance.

3. Justifiable tax amount.

Therefore, only KRW 200,604,117 shall be deemed to have been inherited in cash after deducting the total amount of KRW 569,525,883, which was recognized to have been consumed by the Deceased from among the total amount of KRW 775,00,00, KRW 350,000, KRW 255,000, KRW 258,130,000, which was received by the Deceased within 2 years of his death (the Defendant divided the cash acquired by the Deceased into KRW 3,00,00, KRW 157,00,00, KRW 355,00,00, and KRW 258,00, and KRW 70,000, KRW 70,000, KRW 70,000, KRW 70,000, KRW 70,000, KRW 360,000, KRW 70,000, KRW 70,000.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, each part of the amount exceeding KRW 346,726,610 among the amount of KRW 520,089,910, among the amount of the inheritance tax of 611,569,460, the amount of KRW 520,089,910, the amount of KRW 407,712,970, and the amount of KRW 346,726,610, which was imposed by the defendant against the plaintiff ○○ in April 1, 1993, shall be revoked illegally. Thus, each of the claims by the plaintiffs in this case is reasonable within the scope of the above recognition, and the remaining claims are dismissed without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

August 24, 1995