증여세부과처분취소
1. The Defendant’s disposition of imposing gift tax of KRW 300,069,00 (including penalty tax) imposed on the Plaintiff on September 1, 2012 shall be revoked.
2...
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On December 31, 2007, the Plaintiff received KRW 1.8 billion from B, and entered into a contract to establish a right to lease on a deposit basis with respect to C and Gangnam-gu Seoul apartment No. 2804 (hereinafter “the apartment of this case”). From January 26, 2008 to January 25, 2010, the Plaintiff established a right to lease on a deposit basis with regard to the lease deposit amounting to KRW 1.8 billion and the period from January 26, 2008
After that, on January 29, 2008, the Plaintiff completed the registration of chonsegwon in the name of the Plaintiff on the apartment of this case.
B. B filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff on March 4, 2009 against the Seoul Central District Court (2009Gahap24106) to register the transfer of the right to lease on a deposit basis, and the judgment was rendered on July 2, 2009.
Accordingly, the Plaintiff appealed from B on the ground that “the amount of KRW 1.8 billion was donated from B,” and on February 3, 2010, the Seoul High Court (2009Na65739) confirmed that “the amount of KRW 900 million out of KRW 1.8 billion (hereinafter “the amount of this case”) was the Plaintiff, and that the remaining KRW 900 million was in B.
C. On September 1, 2012, the Defendant imposed and notified gift tax of KRW 300,069,00 (including penalty tax) on the Plaintiff on the ground that “the instant amount was donated by B” (hereinafter “instant disposition”).
The Plaintiff appealed and filed an appeal on December 7, 2012, but was dismissed by the Tax Tribunal on May 16, 2013.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 10 (including paper numbers), Eul evidence No. 2, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. Considering that the Plaintiff’s assertion and B maintained a marital relationship on the premise of marriage, it is reasonable to deem that the instant amount was paid as consolation money, etc., in light of the following: (a) the Plaintiff’s assertion and B maintained a marital relationship on the premise of marriage; (b) failure occurred; and (c) the Plaintiff’s emotional, material, and consolation materials claimed by the Plaintiff, and the agreement on the compensation for damages arising from marriage.
(b).