beta
(영문) 서울고등법원 2011. 08. 17. 선고 2011누4208 판결

명의신탁된 주식에 해당함[국승]

Case Number of the immediately preceding lawsuit

Seoul Administrative Court 2010Guhap4041 ( December 24, 2010)

Title

Whether title trust shares can be seen as title trust shares

Summary

(As in the judgment of the first instance court) The fact that the beneficial shareholder has submitted a confirmation document that he held the shares in the title trust as the next name, and there is no financial transaction statement indicating the payment of shares at the time of the acquisition of shares, and thus constitutes the title trust shares.

Cases

2011Nu4208 Revocation of Disposition of Levying Gift Tax

Plaintiff and appellant

KimA

Defendant, Appellant

The director of the tax office.

Judgment of the first instance court

Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2010Guhap40441 decided December 24, 2010

Conclusion of Pleadings

June 22, 2011

Imposition of Judgment

August 17, 2011

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The decision of the first instance shall be revoked. The defendant shall revoke each disposition of imposition of gift tax of KRW 27,154,400 (including additional tax), and KRW 26,337,320 (including additional tax) against the plaintiff on August 3, 2009.

Reasons

1. cite the judgment of the first instance;

The reason why this Court is to use in this case is "fact" following the fifth fifth of the judgment of the court of first instance, : 6) The addition of "no material exists to deem that the plaintiff exercised shareholder's rights, such as the lack of financial transaction details that the plaintiff received dividends as a shareholder of BB engineering," and "no evidence exists to reverse the above recognition on a monthly basis" is the same as the reason of the judgment of the court of first instance except that "no evidence exists to reverse the above recognition by itself" is "no evidence to reverse the above recognition by itself". It is cited in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Conclusion

Plaintiff

The appeal is dismissed.