주권반환
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff was originally listed in the list of shareholders of 76,00 shares in the separate sheet, and the Plaintiff’s wife C was listed in the list of shareholders of 50,000 shares, respectively. However, considering the statement of changes in shares in the year 2012 of the above company, the Plaintiff stated that the Defendant, his/her children E and F, and his/her wife G, each of which is 15,000 shares, were donated to the Defendant, his/her children E and F, and the Defendant’s wife.
B. On February 28, 2013 and April 30, 2013, each donee paid gift tax (Defendant: 69,364,800 won, E and F: KRW 97,194,240, KRW 73,864,800, respectively) on the ground that each donee received a donation from the Plaintiff for each of 15,000 shares of the LAD on November 30, 2012).
C. The statement of changes in stocks, etc. submitted to the competent tax office in accordance with the Corporate Tax Act in 2014 states that 16,000 shares remaining in the Plaintiff’s name (76,00 shares - 60,000 shares donated on November 30, 2012) and 36,000 shares out of 56,00 shares in the name of C, which are the aggregate of 66,000 shares, are each donated to G by the Defendant and the remainder of 30,00 shares.
Husband and wife of the defendant is the same year as April 30, 2014.
6. In two instances, a gift tax (Defendant: 166,564,800 won, G: 178,264,800 won) was paid on the ground that “AD shares were donated by C in each 20,000 shares,” and on the ground that “The Defendant received KRW 16,000 shares of the same company from the Plaintiff on December 31, 2014 and February 28, 2015” (Defendant: 18,4320, G: 140,000 won) was paid on the ground that “The Defendant received each donation from C of the same company shares from the Plaintiff on September 30, 2014, and KRW 16,000,000 from the Plaintiff.”
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2-2, Gap evidence 7-1 through 5, Gap evidence 8-1 through 4, Gap evidence 10-1 to 13, Eul evidence 1-2, Eul evidence 1-1 and Eul evidence 1-2, and tax information sent by the Nam Daegu Tax Office and the Yongsan Tax Office according to the order to submit a report by this court, the purport of the whole pleadings, and the purport of the whole pleadings.
2. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion is in C’s name among the shares listed in the separate sheet.