객관적인 교환가치가 적정하게 반영되었다고 볼 수 없어 보충적평가방법으로 과세한 처분은 적법함[국승]
Seoul Administrative Court 201Guhap8406 ( October 24, 2011)
early 2010Ch2291 ( December 23, 2010)
A disposition that is imposed as a supplementary assessment method because the objective exchange value cannot be deemed to have been properly reflected is legitimate.
(The same as the judgment of the first instance court) Since the value of reported stocks cannot be deemed to have been appropriately reflected in the objective exchange value, the disposition imposing gift tax by deeming that the market value at the time of donation is unclear at the time of donation is lawful, since it is not deemed that the objective exchange value could have been determined by free will through equal negotiations.
2011Nu25489 Revocation of Disposition of Imposition of Gift Tax
regular AA 2 persons
1. 2 others
Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2011Guhap8406 decided June 24, 2011
November 16, 2011
December 21, 2011
1. All appeals by the plaintiffs are dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.
The decision of the first instance court shall be revoked. The imposition of gift tax of KRW 940,452.180, which the head of the Guro-gu Tax Office rendered against the Plaintiff Jung-gu on January 6, 201 with respect to the Plaintiff Jung-gu on January 10, 2011 by the head of the Seoul District Tax Office at KRW 944,579,030. The imposition of gift tax of KRW 950,397.140 on January 1, 201 by the head of the Gangnam-gu Tax Office against the Plaintiff Jung-gu Tax Office shall be revoked.
1. cite the judgment of the first instance;
The reason why this Court is used in relation to this case is as follows: (2)(a)(b)(6)(6)(6)(6)(6)(3)(6)(1)(6)(1)(6)(6)(1)(1)(6)(1)(1)(1)(1)(1)(1)(1)(1)(1)(1)(1)
(A) The first transaction transferor is the father and father of the plaintiffs and the joint representative director of the DDDD (74% of the equity ratio of 148,000 shares) and the second transaction transferor, the joint representative director of the DDDD., the second transaction transferor, the second transaction transferor, the wife of the E high school, KimG. The third transaction transferor, the wife of the EH. 4.5 transaction transferor, the E high school motive of the EHH. 5 transaction transferor, the EH. The 6 transaction transferor, is the E-Gu office and the DD auditor, the DD auditor. The 7.8 transaction transferor is the E-Gu office and the DD auditor, the second transaction transferor, and the second transaction transferor is the representative director of the K K parking lot, and it is difficult to view each of the parties to the transaction of this case as the transferee or the joint representative director of the DD DD, both of the parties to the transaction of this case.
(B) It does not immediately mean that there is no transaction between persons with a special relationship as stipulated in Article 26(4) of the Enforcement Decree of the Corporate Tax Act, and thus, can not be immediately recognized as a legitimate transaction example. In light of the relationship between each of the parties to the instant transaction and the staticP, it does not appear that the objective transaction value could have been determined by free will
2. Conclusion
All appeals by the plaintiffs are dismissed.