This disposition based on the premise that the shares were transferred to the transaction price is illegal.

B. Relevant statutes

The entries in the attached Table-related statutes are as follows.

C. Determination as to the assertion that the stock evaluation by supplementary evaluation methods is unlawful

1) Relevant legal principles

A) The main text of Article 60(1) of the former Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act is that the inheritance tax or gift tax is levied under this Act.

The value of property subject to an inheritance shall be the value as of the date the inheritance commences or the date of donation (hereinafter referred to as the "date of appraisal").

Paragraph 2 provides that "The market price shall be determined by the market price," and Paragraph 1 provides that the market price shall be determined among many and unspecified persons.

such value as would normally be established if a transaction is made freely;

Expropriation price, public sale price, appraisal price, and other goods recognized as the market price, as prescribed by Presidential Decree;

In addition, the main sentence of Article 49(1) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act provides that "the law shall apply."

Article 60(2) of the former Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act provides that “The market price is recognized as the market price, as prescribed by Presidential Decree, such as the expropriation price, public sale price, and appraisal price, means the price confirmed under any of the following subparagraphs in cases of trading, etc. within six months (three months in cases of donated property) before or after the evaluation base date.” The main text and proviso of the same paragraph provide that “if a fact of trading the relevant property exists, it shall be the transaction amount, but it shall not include cases where the transaction price is objectively deemed unfair due to a transaction, etc. with a related party, etc.” Meanwhile, Article 60(3) of the former Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act provides that “if it is difficult to calculate the market price, the method prescribed in Articles 61 through 65 (hereinafter referred to as “additional evaluation method

section 63(1)1(c) provides that the value assessed shall be deemed to be the market price, and the cost shall be deemed to be the market price.

The supplementary evaluation method for listed stocks and investment shares is provided.

B) According to each of the above provisions, in the case of unlisted stocks, the market value of which is small

Where there is a transaction fact, the value of the shares shall be appraised by considering the transaction value at the market price.

not be assessed by supplementary assessment methods prescribed by the Inheritance and Gift Tax Act; however, the market price

§ 1 (Purpose) This Guidelines is to sell or purchase shares issued by AA Corporation (hereinafter referred to as "Corporation") among officers or employees.

The objective is to establish standards for reasonable and fair operation.

Article 2 (Persons subject to Stock Trading) Stock Trading shall be limited to those officers and employees who hold office in the company as of the date of trading.

§ 4 (Methods of Sales of Stocks) (1) Trading of stocks shall require agreement between the transferor and the transferee and the approval of the company and the delivery of share certificates.

(3) At the time of the sale of shares, the trading unit price per share shall be the amount offered to shareholders in writing or by electronic document from the company in the corresponding year.

§ 6 (1) The Company shall set the unit price of stock transaction for the pertinent year after the settlement of accounts each year and fix the unit price of stock transaction for shareholders.

shall be publicly announced.

(2) The time when the unit price of shares is determined shall be after the resolution of the annual general meeting of shareholders. The method shall be accounting corporations or certified accounts

shall be governed by the net asset value calculation method assessed by the company.

(3)The net asset value calculation method of shares under paragraph (2) shall be as follows:

- Net capital amount (total capital amount - non-performing assets) / total number of issued stocks - dividend amount per stock on December 30 of the immediately preceding year;

0

(4)The period of application of the unit price of shares for the pertinent year shall be from January 1 to December 31, 12, and (hereinafter referred to as "the period")

means an objective exchange price formed through a general and normal transaction, as such;

in order for transaction example to be recognized as the market price, the transaction in question is general and normal.

that the objective exchange value at the time of the date of transfer may be reasonably reflected;

The circumstances should be recognized (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Du26988, Apr. 26, 2012).

2) Determination

A) The purport of the entire argument in the instant case is as follows: health class Nos. 1, 2, and 4

Comprehensively, the following facts can be acknowledged.

(1) The guidelines for stock sale of this case, which A has been established and implemented since 2005

The following are included (Evidence A No. 1).

(2) AA’s shares publicly announced in accordance with the guidelines for stock purchase and sale of this case

per share trading unit price shall be 2,887 won, 3,863 won in 2011, 3,802 won in 2012, and 6,032 won in 2013;

AA with 9,019 won in 2014, 12,129 won in 2015, and at least 10,000 weeks in each year from 2011 to 2015.

The shares were traded on each unit price of transaction, and the Plaintiff also purchased on March 24, 2014 from this CH.

The instant shares (153,00 shares) were purchased in 9,019 won per share, which is the trading unit price in 2014.

B) (1) AA share transactions are free from many and unspecified persons.

(1) AA executives and employees pursuant to the guidelines for stock purchase of this case.

AA, not the price freely formed between the parties to the transaction.

The price determined by the base price per share assessed and publicly notified every year in accordance with the guidelines for such purchase;

(2) The net capital (base price) per share issued by AA is from 2,887 won in 2010 to 2015

At least 12,129 won a year, and the value of AA shares was increased by only net asset value.

In case of evaluation, the continuous commercial value of the company cannot be properly reflected, and the AA's publicly notified standards

It is difficult to see that the price constitutes an objective exchange value of the instant shares, and (3) the instant case

The transaction value shall be KRW 9,019 per share of the shares of this case, and shall be assessed by the defendant in accordance with the supplementary assessment methods.

The value per share of the instant shares at the time of the instant transaction is at least twice higher than the transaction value of the instant shares.

Further to 22,025 per share, the transaction value of this case is general and normal transaction.

of this case’s shares. Accordingly, the defendant cannot be deemed to constitute the objective market price of the shares of this case.

A. Supplementary evaluation methods prescribed in the former Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act at the time of the transaction of this case

The evaluation is lawful. The plaintiff's assertion on this part is without merit.

D. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

Article 35(2) of the former Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act between persons who are not specially related persons prescribed by Presidential Decree.

In the case of acquisition or transfer of property, it is considerably higher than the market price without justifiable grounds under transaction practices.

If property is acquired or transferred by transfer at a low price or at a very high price, the price therefor and:

Benefits prescribed by Presidential Decree by presumption that the amount equivalent to the difference between the market price has been donated;

Article 26 (5) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act provides that "The scope of value which is remarkably low or significantly high when applying paragraph (2) of the same Article shall be determined by Presidential Decree," and Article 35 (2) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act provides that "the value of the acquired property subtracting the price from the market price of the acquired property is 30/10 or more of the market price," while Article 35 (2) of the Act provides that "the profits prescribed by Presidential Decree" means the value calculated in accordance with paragraph (5) less 300 million won from the difference between the price calculated in accordance with paragraph (5) and the market price."

per share assessed in accordance with the supplementary assessment methods prescribed in tax-related Acts shall be deemed 22,025 won

C. As examined in the above, at least 30% of the above market price through the transaction of this case by the plaintiff

1.(b) recognized in the preceding 1.B. that the shares of this case were purchased in 9,019 won per low price.

Therefore, the Plaintiff at the market price of the instant shares at the time of the instant transaction to the Plaintiff.

The instant disposition, which calculated and imposed the gift tax amount of KRW 737,265,530 (including additional taxes) on the basis of the amount obtained by subtracting the actual transfer value and KRW 300 million (including KRW 1,689,918,000), is lawful as provided for in Article 35 (2) and (3) of the former Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act and Article 26 (5) and (7) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act.

3. Conclusion

The plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

2. The disposition of imposition of gift tax of KRW 7,265,530 (including general non-reported penalty of KRW 103,193,440, and additional additional tax of KRW 118,104,892) imposed on the Plaintiff on August 1, 2016 by the former Defendant, who was at the office of the Plaintiff, shall be revoked.

A. The Plaintiff was appointed as an internal director of AA Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “AA”) on January 28, 2014, and served as a representative director of AA from November 1, 2014. This CH served as an internal director of AA from June 26, 2009 to December 31, 2013.

B. On March 24, 2014, the Plaintiff purchased 9,019 won per share (hereinafter referred to as “the instant transaction”) of 153,000 common shares (the face value 1,000 won per share; hereinafter referred to as “the instant shares”) for issuance of AA Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “AA”). The Commissioner of the National Tax Service conducted an investigation of changes in shares with AA around June 2016, he/she notified the Plaintiff of the purchase of the instant shares at least 30% of the price per share as of the instant transaction date in accordance with the supplementary assessment method stipulated in the former Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act (amended by Act No. 1357, Dec. 15, 2015; hereinafter referred to as “BA”), and the Plaintiff notified the Plaintiff of the purchase of the instant shares at least 30% of the price per share.

D. On August 1, 2016, the Defendant dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim for revocation of the disposition of this case on the following grounds: (a) KRW 737,265,530 (including general non-reported penalty tax 103,193,440, KRW 118,104, KRW 892) (including additional tax 103, KRW 440, KRW 118, KRW 104, KRW 892) (including additional tax 103, KRW 300, KRW 118, KRW 104, KRW 892) (including additional tax ; hereinafter referred to as “instant disposition”) under Article 26(5) and (6) of the Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 26960, Feb. 5, 2016); and (b) the Plaintiff claimed revocation of the disposition of this case on May 16, 2010.

[Reasons for Recognition] Uncontentious Facts, Gap evidence 1 to 3, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff's assertion

Since the establishment of AA in 2003, executives and employees have operated 100% of its issued stocks as employees' props, and since 2005, in order to maintain employee stocks, AA has enacted and implemented guidelines for stock purchase (hereinafter referred to as "the guidelines for stock purchase") with the purport that "If executives and employees retire, they shall calculate all of their shares as net asset value calculation method (net capital amount/total number of issued stocks) per share and transfer them to the officially announced base price."

Considering the fact that the transaction price of the instant shares is the base price calculated and publicly announced by the net asset value calculation method that indicates the present value of the instant shares in accordance with the guidelines for purchase of shares, and that shares issued by AA can be traded only on the base price, and that it cannot be sold to any person other than an executive officer or employee of AA, and that AA shares are traded at the above base price for not less than 10 years, the said transaction price constitutes the market price that appropriately reflects the objective exchange value of the instant shares. Therefore, the value calculated by the supplementary method under the former Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act is deemed the market price of the instant shares, and thus, the Plaintiff is remarkably lower than