Suwon District Court-2016-Guhap6996 (Law No. 19, 2017)

It can not be viewed as the market price, and there is no justifiable reason in the transaction practice.

(As in the judgment of the court of first instance) If a trade official's legitimate ground is proved to a considerable extent, it is necessary to prove that the taxpayer who is easy to submit detailed materials about the details of the transaction, the reason for determining the transaction terms, etc.

The donation of profits under Article 39 of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act

2017Nu65618 Revocation of Disposition of Imposition of Gift Tax

AA and 5

Head of Si Tax Office and 3

November 17, 2017

December 15, 2017

1. The plaintiffs' appeals against the defendants are all dismissed. 2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

The judgment of the first instance court shall be revoked. Each Defendants listed in the column of “Defendant” in the list of imposition of gift tax in the attached Form.

The list "the date of disposal" shall be revoked all the imposition of each gift tax (including additional tax) stated in the "Gift" column for each of the plaintiffs as stated on the corresponding date.

1. Quotation of the reasons for the judgment of the first instance;

The reason for this judgment is as follows, with the exception of revising part of the judgment of the court of first instance as follows. Therefore, it shall be cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

In ○○ 9, 10 to 11, “JGM and KAH were directors of the company in the past,” “JGM was a director of the company in the present case from February 2, 2005 to September 2008, and KAH invested as a shareholder from the time of the establishment of the company in the present case, and retired from the company on February 2005.” The term “it is difficult to know the process of determining the price” in 09, 14 to 15 was written “no specific circumstances, such as the reason for determining the price, etc.”.

The lower part was cut to the lower part of the 10th to the lower part of the 10th nine pages, and the lower part was cut to the lower part. (B) Next, the existence or absence of justifiable reasons in the context of transaction is considered as follows.

(1) In full view of the following circumstances, it is reasonable to view that the Plaintiffs were aware of the facts acknowledged prior to the disposal of the shares and the above quoted facts, YB No. 6, 5, and 6, as the Plaintiff’s 2’s transfer of shares, and that the Plaintiff’s transfer of shares would not have conducted any transaction under the conditions set forth in the Plaintiff’s transfer of shares. As such, it is difficult to view that the Plaintiff’s transfer of shares was 41.6 billion won as the date of the transfer of shares and 16.1 billion won, and that the Plaintiff’s transfer of shares was 5.2 billion won, and that the Plaintiff’s transfer of shares would not have any objective reason for the Plaintiff’s transfer of shares to the Plaintiff’s transfer of shares. As of December 31, 201, it is difficult to view that the Plaintiff’s transfer of shares was 1,000,000 won and KRW 5.2,000,000,000 won.

2. Conclusion

Therefore, all of the plaintiffs' claims against the defendants should be dismissed as it is without merit. The judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion, and the plaintiffs' appeal against the defendants is dismissed as it is without merit.

aa