Whether special profits and losses should be reflected in the valuation of net profits and losses of unlisted stocks;

In cases where the weighted average amount of special profit and loss in accordance with corporate accounting standards for the last three years exceeds 50% of the weighted average amount of ordinary profit and loss in the last three years, the weighted average amount of net profit and loss in the last three years per share shall not be the weighted average amount of net profit and loss in the last three years, except in exceptional circumstances.

Paragraph 1 of Article 56 of the Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act shall apply to the method of calculating net profits and losses for the last three years

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited by the court below, in calculating the value of the non-listed stocks of this case issued by ○○ Tourism Development Co., Ltd. (hereinafter "○○○ Development") inherited by the plaintiff, the court below judged that, in calculating the value of the non-listed stocks of this case, the weighted average amount of the profits and losses for the last three years per share of the non-listed stocks of this case exceeds 50% of the weighted average amount of the profits and losses for the last three years under the corporate accounting standards without filing a report of the profits and losses under Article 56 (1) 2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act (amended by Act No. 8828, Dec. 31, 2007; hereinafter "the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act") within the time limit for filing the inheritance tax base return under Article 67 of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 17828, Dec. 30, 2002; hereinafter "Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax Act") and disposition of this case shall not be unlawful.

In light of relevant Acts and subordinate statutes and the records, the above determination by the court below is justifiable.

The court below did not err in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the method of assessing unlisted stocks according to supplementary evaluation methods as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

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.