Seoul Administrative Court 2007Guhap34774 ( August 29, 2008)

Whether the imposition of gift tax on an act of unauthorized representation is illegal

An absentee's act of unauthorized representation performed by the administrator without the permission of the court does not constitute an invalid act because the administrator of the absentee's property successors have ratified it, and a disposition of imposition on such act is not unlawful.

The contents of the decision shall be the same as attached.

Article 39 (Presumption of Donation at Time of Capital Increase or Capital Reduction)

1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs and the defendants are dismissed.

2.The costs of appeal shall be for their own answers.

1. Purport of claim

피고 종로셰무서장이 2007.1.8.원고 민◯서애 대하여 한 2000년표 귀속증여세 488,716.650원과 171,817,410원의 각 부과격분 및 피고 반포세무서장이 2007.1.2.원고 민◯순에 대하여 한 2000년도 귀속증여세 63,484,360원과 25,702,290원의 각 부과처분을 모두 취소한다.

2. Purport of appeal

A. The plaintiffs

제1심 판결 중 원고들 패소부분을 취소한다. 피고 종로세무서장이 2007.1.8.원고 민◯서에 대하여 한 2000년도 귀속 증여세 488,716,650원과 171,817,410원의 각 부과 처분 중 349,083,320원과 122,726,720원의 각 부파처분 및 펴고 반포세무서장이 2007.1.2.원고 민◯순에 대하여 한 2000년도 귀속증여세 63,484,360원과 25,702,290원의 각 부과처분 중 45,345,970원과 18,358,780원의 각 부과처분을 취소한다.(항소장의 항소 취지 제2항의 118,353,780원은 '18,358,780원'의 오기이다).

B. The Defendants

The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the defendants shall be revoked, and all plaintiffs' claims corresponding to the revoked part shall be dismissed.

1. A part citing a judgment of the first instance;

The reasoning of the court's explanation on this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of the judgment on the parties' arguments, as provided in paragraph (2). Thus, it is citing this as it is in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and

2. Additional determination

A. Judgment on the plaintiffs' assertion

원고들은, 이 사건 감자 중 민◯식의 지분환급으로 인한 부분은 민◯식의 부재자재산관리인이 법원의 허가를 받지 아니하고 한 것이어서 무효이므로, 이 사건 각 처분 중 무효인 민◯식의 지분 감자로 인한 증여세 부과처분은 위법하다는 취지의 주장을 한다.

그러나, 갑 제7호증의 1, 2, 3, 갑 제8호증의 각 기재에 의하면, 민◯식의 부재자 재산관리인들이 한 위와 같은 무권대리행위를 민◯식의 재산상속인들이 추인한 사실을 인정할 수 있으므로, 원고들의 주장은 이유 없다(원고들도 이 사건 변론종결일 이후 참고 서면을 제출하면서, 그러한 무권대리행위 추인 사실을 인정하고 있다).

B. Determination of the defendants' assertion

The defendants asserted that since the plaintiffs did not dispute the illegality of additional tax in the procedure of the previous trial of this case, the illegality of additional tax cannot be asserted in the procedure of this case.

However, according to the evidence Nos. 2-1, 2 and 2, it is recognized that the plaintiffs asserted the illegality of each of the dispositions of this case, including additional tax, in the previous trial procedure of this case, and in such a case, it is unreasonable and unreasonable for the plaintiffs to claim the illegality of the imposition of additional tax in the litigation procedure of this case, and therefore, the defendants' assertion is

Conclusion

Therefore, the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and all appeals by the plaintiffs and the defendants are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.