(심리불속행) 조세회피목적이 있는 명의신탁에 해당함[국승]
Seoul High Court Decision 2011Nu32081 (Law No. 19, 2012)
National High Court Decision 2005No1396 ( December 07, 2005)
(C) the title trust with the purpose of tax avoidance
(C) In the case of a trust agreement with an individual shareholder, the Plaintiff Company provided a deposit as collateral, and there is no reason to believe that it constitutes a fraudulent name theft. It is reasonable to deem that there was an intent to avoid the burden of corporate tax to avoid the sale of the instant treasury shares under the real name conversion to the name of the Plaintiff Company in addition to the main purpose of the stock price management of the Plaintiff Company’s shares in the
2012Du10765 Revocation of Disposition of Imposition of Gift Tax, etc.
XX Co., Ltd. and three others
Daejeon District Tax Office and three others
Supreme Court Decision 2007Du17175 Decided September 8, 2011
Seoul High Court Decision 2011Nu32081 Decided April 19, 2012
All appeals are dismissed.
The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.
All of the records of this case and the judgment of the court below and the grounds of appeal were examined, but their arguments on the grounds of appeal by the appellant fall under Article 4 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure of Appeal, and therefore, all of the appeals are dismissed under Article 5 of the same Act. It is so decided
Reference materials.
If the grounds for final appeal are not included in the grounds of appeal that make it appropriate for the court of final appeal to become a legal trial, such as matters concerning significant violation of Acts and subordinate statutes, etc., the system of final appeal will not continue to proceed with the deliberation on the merits of the grounds for final appeal, but will not proceed with the deliberation on the merits of the grounds for final