이 사건 처분의 당연무효 당부[국패]
Seoul Central District Court-2015-Ga group-5318077 ( April 22, 2016)
Appropriateness of the invalidity of the disposition of this case
Although depository receipts may be derived from stock certificates, when considering the fact that both parties are different, the disposition in this case shall be null and void as a matter of course.
The scope of transfer income under Article 118-2 of the Income Tax Act
2016Na27145 Undue gains
AA
Korea
August 24, 2016
September 7, 2016
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
1. Purport of claim
With respect to KRW 00,00,000 and KRW 00,000 among them, the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff 5% per annum from January 1, 201 to the delivery date of a duplicate of the complaint of this case, and 20% per annum from the next day to the day of complete payment.
2. Purport of appeal
Among the judgment of the first instance, the part against the plaintiff shall be revoked, and the plaintiff's claim corresponding to the revoked part shall be dismissed.
1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;
The court's reasoning for this case is that the shareholders of the first instance court's 4th to 6th 6th 6th 'the first instance court' were examined as including depository receipts in the taxable objects under the premise that they are not included in the stock as stipulated in Article 118-2 Item 3 of the former Income Tax Act, and that the Ministry of Strategy and Finance' was announced August 24, 2010. Also, Article 118-2 subparagraph 3 of the former Income Tax Act provides that "the transfer income from the transfer of assets abroad of a resident shall be the income from the transfer of stocks or equity shares which are prescribed by the Presidential Decree among the assets abroad in the current year, and it is clear that the shareholders of the 00th 'the stocks or equity shares which are prescribed by the Presidential Decree' should be interpreted as "the above 10th 6th 'the stocks issued by a foreign corporation and the stocks which are listed in a foreign market similar to the securities market or the Association under the Securities and Exchange Act' as stated in the above 18th 'no taxation without the law.
2. Conclusion
Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified within the scope of the above recognition, and the remaining claim is dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the defendant's appeal.