[2] Whether inclusion of a goodwill in inherited property violates the principle of no taxation without law or the prohibition of comprehensive delegation (negative)

[2] The term "business right" refers to an intangible asset value, such as the company's tradition, social credibility, location conditions, existence of special manufacturing technology or transactional relationship, which means the excess profit-making ability that can raise higher profits than the ordinary profit of other companies engaged in the same kind of business due to its business function or characteristics. Under Articles 2 (1) and 3 (1) 9 of the former Inheritance Tax Act (amended by Act No. 5193 of Dec. 30, 196), Article 5 (5) 1 of the former Enforcement Decree of the same Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 15193 of Dec. 31, 1996) provides for the evaluation of the business right according to delegation of Article 9 (2) of the former Inheritance Tax Act, so even if the business right is imposed on inherited property, it does not violate the principle of no taxation without law or prohibition of delegation.

1. As to the aggregate of goodwill

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below determined that the deceased non-party 1's death recognized the fact that the plaintiffs succeeded to the cooperative machinery and the Nowon-gu basin, which is an individual company for the deceased's management, and rejected the disposition of this case where the value of the business rights should be calculated by adding up the value of the business rights to the aggregate of inherited property by calculating the value of the business rights to the Nowon-gu basin based on the formula under Article 5 (5) 1 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax Act (amended by the Presidential Decree No. 15193, Dec. 31, 1996; hereinafter referred to as the "former Enforcement Decree") concerning the evaluation of the business rights. The court below rejected the plaintiffs' assertion that the business rights should be calculated by adding up the value of the business rights to the Nowon-gu basin, which is calculated by adding up the value of inherited property, to the inherited property value, even if the business rights cannot be viewed as the value of the business rights cannot be calculated by adding up the value of inherited property.

In light of the relevant statutes and the records, the above judgment of the court below is just, and there is no error of law in incomplete deliberation as to aggregate of the value of the goodwill as otherwise alleged in the ground of appeal.

2. As to the violation of the principle of no taxation without representation and prohibition of comprehensive delegation

A business right refers to an intangible asset value, such as the company's tradition, social credibility, location conditions, existence of special manufacturing technology or transactional relationship, which makes it possible to make profits higher than the ordinary profits of other companies engaged in the same kind of business due to its business functions or characteristics (see Supreme Court Decision 95Nu18697, May 28, 1997). Under each of the provisions of Articles 2(1) and 3(1)9 of the former Inheritance Tax Act (amended by Act No. 5193, Dec. 30, 1996; hereinafter referred to as the "former Act"), and Article 5(5)1 of the former Enforcement Decree provides for the value evaluation of the business right as one of inherited property, so even if the business right is imposed on inherited property, it does not violate the principle of no taxation without law or prohibition of comprehensive delegation.

The decision of the court below to the same purport is just, and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the principle of no taxation without representation or the prohibition of comprehensive delegation, or in the examination.

3. As to double taxation

The plaintiffs inherited the business rights of the cooperative machinery and bear the inheritance tax, and even if they are subject to separate income tax on the business income or transfer income accruing from continuing or transferring the business after succession, the inheritance tax and income tax are not subject to double taxation, as long as they are different objects of taxation, so it does not constitute double taxation. Therefore, the court below's decision which did not consider such issues does not err in the misapprehension of law as required in the grounds of appeal.

4. Therefore, all appeals are dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Lee Jae-in (Presiding Justice)