1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The grounds for the court’s explanation on this part of the plaintiffs’ assertion are as stated in the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, this part is cited by Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

(a) The details of the relevant statutes are as shown in the attached statutes;

B. Whether payment in kind of gift tax constitutes a transfer for value of an asset on which transfer income tax may be imposed; 1) the former Income Tax Act (amended by Act No. 10900, Jul. 25, 2011; hereinafter the same applies)

Article 4(1) of the former Income Tax Act provides that a resident’s income shall be classified into global income, retirement income, and capital gains (Article 88(1)3) shall be “income accruing from the transfer of assets.” The main text of Article 88(1) of the former Income Tax Act provides that “transfer of assets is actually transferred for consideration without having any relation to registration or enrollment of the assets,” and that sale, exchange, investment in kind in a corporation, etc. of the assets are taken place as an example of the transfer of assets. It does not mean that only where assets are transferred for reasons other than sale, exchange, or investment in kind in a corporation, such assets shall not be deemed “transfer” in capital gains. Thus, even if assets are actually transferred for consideration, if assets are transferred for consideration, it shall be deemed that the transfer, which is the cause of taxation of capital gains tax, has been made (see Supreme Court Decision 2010Du15452, Dec. 9, 2010); in light of the aforementioned statutory provisions and relevant legal principles, the gift tax paid in kind in lieu of the gift tax in kind.