The time of determining whether the inherited property is a property on which the right to collateral security or joint mortgage has been created.

Under the provisions of Article 9(1) of the Inheritance Tax Act, the value of inherited property shall be assessed on the basis of the current state at the time of commencement of the inheritance. Such evaluation principle shall be deemed equally applied not only to the case of assessing the value of inherited property according to the principle of assessment under Article 9(1) of the Inheritance Tax Act, Article 5 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, but also to the case of assessing according to the exceptional method of assessment under Article 9(4) of the same Act and Article 5-2 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act. Therefore, whether inherited property constitutes the property on which a joint mortgage under subparagraph 2 of Article 5-2 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act is established or not

Article 9 of the Inheritance Tax Act, Article 5 of the Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax Act

Plaintiff

The director of Busan District Office

Daegu High Court Decision 85Gu329 delivered on March 21, 1986

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

Article 9(1) and Article 5(2)1 of the Inheritance Tax Act, effective at the time of the commencement of the inheritance (82.4.2) provides that the value of the inherited property, among the inherited property, shall be calculated at the market price at the time of the commencement of the inheritance; when it is difficult to calculate the market price, it shall be calculated at the market price at the time of the commencement of the inheritance; (a) in a specific area prescribed by the Commissioner of the National Tax Service, it shall be calculated at the rate calculated by the rate; and (b) in other areas, it shall be calculated at the standard market price under the Local Tax Act; (d) in Article 9(4) and Article 5-2 subparag. 3 of the Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax Act, the value of the inherited property, created by the right to collateral security, shall be the larger amount between the maximum amount of the secured claim and the appraised value under the provisions of Articles 9(1), 5(1) and 5(2)1 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, as determined by the court below, the aggregate of the maximum debt amount of Article 3000,3600,00,000,00, and300,00,00,0,00.

This paper argues that the court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the calculation of maximum debt amount and tax base value, on the ground that each mortgage registered on the land above the ground was completed when the plaintiff newly constructed a building on the ground and completed a building on the ground as additional collateral, and that the construction was not completed until the commencement of the inheritance. However, since the new building was not completed until the commencement of the inheritance, the construction of the building was completed on July 10, 1982 and provided as additional collateral, the maximum debt amount secured by the inherited property in this case (property) cannot be considered as the assessed amount of the land, and only the amount calculated by dividing the maximum debt amount by the value of the building provided as additional collateral with the land should be assessed as the value of the inherited property.

However, pursuant to Article 9(1) of the Inheritance Tax Act, the value of inherited property shall be appraised by the current state at the time of commencement of the inheritance, and such evaluation principle shall be equally applied not only to the case of assessing the value of inherited property according to the principle of assessment under Article 9(1) and Article 5(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax Act, but also to the case of assessing according to the exceptional method of assessment under Article 9(4) and Article 5-2 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act. Thus, whether inherited property is a property for which the right to collateral security under Article 5(2)3 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act is established or not shall be determined at the time of commencement of the inheritance.

Therefore, even if the argument of appeal is asserted, it cannot be deemed that the inherited property of this case is the property on which the joint mortgage was created at the time of commencing the inheritance. Therefore, the judgment of the court below which rejected the argument in the same purport is just, and there is no misapprehension of legal principles as argued in the arguments.

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.

Justices Lee B-soo (Presiding Justice)