beta
(영문) 서울행정법원 2016.04.08 2015구합68000

증여세부과처분취소

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. Nonparty B (hereinafter “the deceased”) died on June 1, 2013, and accordingly, Nonparty B’s heir (spouse C, son D, and E) reported inheritance tax on December 31, 2013.

B. The Director of the Seoul Regional Tax Office: (a) from March 24, 2014 to the same year;

8. up to February, the Plaintiff, who was not in any relationship with the deceased, was donated the property from the deceased, and the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of taxation data so that gift tax is imposed on the land and buildings located in Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F (hereinafter “the instant non-real estate”) acquired by the Plaintiff around 2007, based on the presumption of donation of the property acquisition fund, on G land and buildings located in G acquired in 2009 and 2010 (hereinafter “the instant real estate”), and on the donation of the acquisition fund (1/2 shares) and real estate (1/2 shares).

C. Accordingly, on August 18, 2014, the Defendant decided and notified the Plaintiff of the gift tax (including additional tax) as shown in attached Table 2.

The Plaintiff filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal on the instant disposition (hereinafter collectively referred to as the “instant disposition”) in the [Attachment 2] Nos. 4 through 8, but the Tax Tribunal dismissed the Plaintiff’s appeal on April 20, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 and 2 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion that: (a) around April 2004, the deceased and his husband maintained a de facto marital relationship as a husband and wife from the end of April 2009; (b) liquidated a de facto marital relationship around June 2009 by verbal abuse and unlawful act of the deceased; and (c) the acquisition fund of 1/2 shares out of the instant real estate (hereinafter “acquisition fund”) was paid as a division of property and consolation money for the destruction of a de facto marital relationship from the deceased, and thus, the disposition against which gift tax was imposed is unlawful.