상속세 및 증여세부과처분취소
1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
1. The reasoning of the court’s explanation concerning this case is as follows, and this case is cited by Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, since the court’s explanation is identical to the ground of the judgment of the first instance, except where part of the judgment of the first instance is cited as follows
4. The 4th line “Evidences 3 through 5” shall be understood as “Evidences 3 through 16.”
4 The last line from “However,” to 5 pages 1 to 2 shall be as follows:
“A lack of evidence to acknowledge otherwise,” solely on the ground that D continuously ordered a government-funded construction work from around 1990 to 2008, it is difficult to deem that the deceased was in need of, or was in fact responsible for, the liability for provisional payment exceeding KRW 1.2 billion to D, and there is no evidence to acknowledge otherwise.
2. In conclusion, the plaintiffs' claims shall be dismissed in its entirety due to the lack of grounds, and the judgment of the court of first instance is justified, and all appeals by the plaintiffs are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.