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

262,017,930 won and the total amount of KRW 137,289,330 shall be revoked.

The reasoning for this Court’s explanation concerning this case is as follows: (a) the reasoning for the judgment of the court of first instance is that of the judgment of the court of first instance except for the following: (b) Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

[Supplementary Use]

"C. Determination"

아래와 같은 관계 법령의 해석 등에 의하면 구 상속세및증여세법 제63조 제3항에서 할증평가의 대상으로 정한 '최대주주등의 주식등'에는 평가대상인 주식을 발행한 법인이 최대주주등으로서 보유하는 다른 법인의 주식도 포함된다 할 것이고, 따라서 ㈜◇◇◇◇◇, □□□□□□ 및 △△△△비금속재료 유한공사가 각 발행한 주식 중 ㈜☆☆☆이 최대주주등으로서 보유하는 주식을 할증평가한 이 사건 처분은 적법하므로, 이와 다른 전제에 선 원고의 주장은 이유 없다.

1) Article 63(3) of the former Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act is applicable to Article 63(1)1 and (2) and Article 60(2) of the same Act.

With respect to stocks, etc. of the largest shareholder, etc. prescribed by Presidential Decree (excluding stocks, etc. prescribed by Presidential Decree, which have deficits under Article 14 (2) of the Corporate Tax Act continuously from the business year that ends within three years before the base date for appraisal of the business year in which the base date for appraisal falls), 20/100 (10/100 in cases of small and medium enterprises prescribed by Presidential Decree) of the value assessed under paragraphs (1) 1 and (2) or the value recognized under Article 60 (2) shall be added, but where the largest shareholder, etc. holds in excess of 50/100 of the total number of outstanding stocks, etc. of the relevant corporation, 30/100 (15/100 in cases of small and medium enterprises prescribed by Presidential Decree) shall be added. In addition, there is no ground for restricting the scope of "stocks, etc. of a corporation with deficits under Article 14 (2) of the Corporate Tax Act continuously from three years before the business year in which the base date for appraisal falls."

"2) 일반적으로 주식은 각 단위 주식 등이 나누어 갖는 주식회사 등의 자산가치와 수익가치를 표창하는 것에 불과하지만, 최대주주등이 보유하는 주식은 그 가치에 더하여 주주의 의결권을 통한 이사회의 지배를 통하여 당해 회사의 경영권 내지 지배권을 행사할 수 있는 특수한 가치, 이른바경영권(지배권) 프레미엄'을 지니고 있다. 이와 같은 회사의 지배권이 정당한 조세부과를 받지 아니하고 낮은 액수의 세금만을 부담한채 이전되는 것을 방지하기 위하여 적정한 과세를 위한 공정한 평가방법을 두고자 함이 구 상속세및증여세법 제63조 제3항의 입법취지이다(헌법재판소 2003. 1. 30. 2002헌바65 결정 참조).",또한 우리 기업의 지배구조가 소유와 경영이 분리되는 관행이 아직 확립되지 아니하여, 많은 경우 특정의 주주 및 그 친족, 그 주주 등이 지배하는 계열회사를 포함한 특수관계인 등의 주주가 기업의 지배권을 소유하고 있으며, 이들 최대주주등은 주식의 증여 혹은 상속을 통하여 그 기업의 지배권을 상속, 증여하는 것이 현실이다. 법인은 다른 법인이 발행한 주식을 보유함으로써 모(母)회사, 자(子)회사, 손자(孫子)회사, 증손(曾孫)회사 순으로 수직적 지배관계를 형성하는데, 모회사의 주식이 증여 또는 상속됨으로써 수증자 또는 상속인이 모회사를 지배하게 될 경우 자연스럽게 그 자회사, 손자회사 등도 지배하게 되는바, 앞서 본 구 상속세및증여세법 제63조 제3항의 입법취지, 우리나라의 상속, 증여 현실 등을 감안할 때, 모회사의 주식을 이전받음으로써 자연스럽게 자회사의 지배까지 가능하도록 하는 것에 대해서도 '최대주주등의 주식등'에 대하여 할증평가를 하도록 둔 구 상속세및증여세법 제63조 제3항을 적용하는 것이 규정 취지에 부합한다.

3) Article 55(1) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act explicitly states that Article 63(3) of the former Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act shall apply to the stocks issued by another corporation, which are held by the issuing corporation of the stocks subject to assessment, for the purpose of calculating the value of the stocks subject to assessment, by stipulating that the net asset value of the relevant corporation’s assets as of the base date of appraisal shall be the value calculated by deducting its liabilities from the value assessed under Articles 60 through 66 of the former Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act, and that the net asset value shall be zero won if the net asset value is not more than zero won.

4) Article 53(6) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act, which is delegated by Article 63(3) of the same Act

3. Article 63(3) of the former Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act provides that a corporation that issued stocks, etc. shall hold stocks, etc. issued by another corporation (hereinafter referred to as "the first stock corporation"), and that the first stock corporation holds stocks, etc. issued by another corporation (including a corporation in the case of investment by another corporation, other than the first stock corporation; hereinafter referred to as "the second stock corporation"), and excludes the first stock of the investing corporation and the second stock of the investing corporation when the second stock corporation falls under the largest shareholder, etc. from "the largest shareholder, etc." (Article 63(3) of the same Act provides that "the second stock of the investing corporation and the second stock of the investing corporation, other than the second stock of the investing corporation, shall not be deemed to mean "the second stock of the investing corporation and the second stock of the investing corporation" as "the second stock of the investing corporation and the second stock of the investing corporation" as "the second stock of the investing corporation and the second stock of the investing corporation" as "the second stock of the investing corporation".

2. Conclusion

Therefore, the judgment of the first instance court is legitimate, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the plaintiff's appeal.