beta
(영문) 대법원 1984. 2. 14. 선고 83누672 판결

[상속세과세가액결정토지처분취소][공1984.4.1.(725),460]

Main Issues

Whether the determination of the taxable value of inherited property is an administrative disposition subject to appeal

Summary of Judgment

The determination of the taxable amount of inheritance taxes under Article 25 of the former Inheritance Tax Act (Act No. 3197, Dec. 28, 1979) shall be prior to the disposition of inheritance tax imposition, and it shall not immediately take effect, but it shall not be said that a person notified of such decision bears specific tax liability or is actually subject to any infringement or disadvantage. Thus, the above determination shall not be deemed an administrative disposition that is subject to appeal litigation.

[Reference Provisions]

Article 25 of the former Inheritance Tax Act (Law No. 3197, Dec. 28, 1979); Article 1 of the Administrative Litigation Act

Reference Cases

Supreme Court Decision 82Nu81 Delivered on September 28, 1982

Plaintiff-Appellant

Plaintiff 1 and 8 others, Counsel for the defendant-appellant's acceptance

Defendant-Appellee

Head of Nam Busan District Tax Office

Judgment of the lower court

Daegu High Court Decision 82Gu103 delivered on November 10, 1983

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined.

The determination of the taxable amount of inheritance tax under Article 25 of the former Inheritance Tax Act (Act No. 3197, Dec. 28, 1979) is a prior decision prior to the disposition of inheritance tax imposition, and it does not take effect immediately, but it cannot be said that the notified person bears specific tax liability or actually bears any infringement or disadvantage, so the above decision cannot be an administrative disposition which is subject to appeal litigation (see Supreme Court Decision 82Nu81, Sept. 28, 1982). Therefore, the dismissal of the plaintiffs' lawsuit in this purport by the court below is justified and it is unreasonable to criticize the judgment of the court below as a dissenting opinion.

Therefore, the appeal is 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 Jeong Tae-tae (Presiding Justice)