Whether withdrawal of deposits constitutes disposal of inherited property

To withdraw a deposit from the deposit account of a financial institution in the name of the predecessor prior to the commencement date of the inheritance, an act extinguishing a deposit claim against the financial institution which is inherited property.

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

Supreme Court Decision 94Nu15929 delivered on May 12, 1995

1. Each disposition of imposing inheritance tax and defense tax on February 1, 1993 with respect to the plaintiffs on February 1, 1993, which exceeds each inheritance tax and defense tax recorded in the same list column of the imposition of inheritance tax and defense tax, shall be revoked. 2. The remaining claims of the plaintiffs on February 1, 1993 are dismissed.

1. Details of the disposition;

The following facts are not disputed between the parties, or if Gap evidence Nos. 1, 5-1, 2, 6, 7, 1-1, 18, 2, and 3-1 through 3 of the evidence Nos. 1-1, 1-2, 3-1, 3-3, there are no other counter-proofs.

가. 소외 강ㅇㅇ는 1990. 10. 17. 사망하여, 위 망인의 처인 원고 박ㅇㅇ와 장남인 원고 강ㅇㅇ가 각 18분의 6씩, 출가한 장녀인 원고 강ㅇㅇ, 차녀인 원고 강ㅇㅇ가 각 18분의 1씩, 차남인 원고 강ㅇㅇ가 18분의 4의 각 상속지분에 따라 위 망인의 재산을 상속하고, 1991. 4. 16. 피고에게 위 망인의 상속재산 가액 금2,213,876,616원에서 인적공제 금103,500,000원을 공제하여 산출한 상속세 금913,965,210원 및 방위세 금182,793,043원을 신고하였다.

B. Accordingly, on February 1, 1993, the defendant made a first correction by adding the amount of KRW 150,210,000 to the above deceased's inherited property pursuant to Article 7-2 of the Inheritance Tax Act (amended by Act No. 4283, Dec. 31, 1990; hereinafter the same) on the ground that the use place of KRW 150,210,00 among the amount withdrawn from the deposit account of the above deceased within one year prior to the commencement of inheritance tax, the defendant made a second correction by adding the amount of each inheritance tax and defense tax stated in the column for the initial imposition of the list to the plaintiffs, after imposing each of the inheritance tax and defense tax on the plaintiffs, the value of the inherited property was increased to KRW 2,66,141,366, as the plaintiffs were dissatisfied with this, the defendant made a second correction by deducting the amount of KRW 43,830,000 from the amount added to the above inherited property on December 8, 1992.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

가. 원고들은, 피고가 피상속인인 소외 망 강ㅇㅇ의 상속재산에 가산한 금106,380,000원(150,210,000원 - 43,830,000원) 중 금59,380,000원은 위 망인 명의의 ㅇㅇ은행 ㅇㅇ지점 보통예금구좌에서 인출된 것이나 이는 실제 예금주인 소외 정ㅇㅇ가 위 망인과의 국민주택 건축 동업계약에 따라 위 국민주택의 건축에 사용하였고, 나머지 금47,000,000원은 위 망인의 ㅇㅇ은행 ㅇㅇ지점 보통예금구좌에서 인출된 것이나 이는 망인 가족의 생활비와 간암으로 사망하기까지의 망인의 치료비 등의 통상적인 비용으로 지출된 것이어서 그 용도가 객관적으로 명백하므로, 이를 상속세법 제7조의 2 에 의하여 상속세 부과의 대상에 포함시킬 수는 없다 할 것이어서, 이 사건 부과처분 중 이 사건 부과처분의 과세표준액 금3,200,921,366원에서 위 가산된 금106,380,000원을 공제한 금3,094,541,366원에 대한 별지 목록 청구금액란 기재 각 상속세 및 방위세 금액을 넘는 부분은 모두 위법하다는 취지의 주장을 한다.

(b) Scope of judgment of party members;

위와 같은 원고들의 이 사건 청구에 대하여, 환송 전의 당심에서 위 망인 명의의 ㅇㅇ은행의 보통예금구좌에서 인출된 금59,380,000원에 관한 원고들의 청구를 인용하고 그 나머지인 ㅇㅇ은행의 보통예금구좌에서 인출된 금47,000,000원에 관한 원고들의 청구를 기각하는 내용의 판결이 선고되었는데, 이에 대하여 원고들만이 상고한 결과 위 당심판결의 원고들 패소부분이 파기환송되었으므로 원고들의 이 사건 청구 중 피고가 상고하지 아니함으로써 확정된 원고들 승소부분을 제외하고 파기환송된 원고들 패소부분(ㅇㅇ은행의 예금에 관한 부분)만이 환송 후 당심의 심판대상이다

(c) Related statutes;

Article 7-2 (1) of the Inheritance Tax Act provides that where an ancestor disposes of inherited property within one year before the date the inheritance commences, if the amount is calculated by the type of property and is at least 50,000,000 won, and the total amount is at least 50,000,000 won, and if the purpose of use is objectively unclear, it shall be included in the taxable value under Article 4. Article 3 (3) of the Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 13196, Dec. 31, 190) provides that the taxable value of the inherited property shall be included in the taxable value under Article 4. Article 7-2 (1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 13196, Dec. 31, 190) provides that where the decedent disposes of the inherited property

라. 그러므로, 피고가 상속개시 전 1년 동안 소외 망 강ㅇㅇ의 ㅇㅇ은행 ㅇㅇ지점 보통예금구좌에서 금원이 인출된 것이 상속재산의 처분에 해당한다고 보고 또 그 사용처가 불분명하다고 하여 그 중 금47,000,000원을 상속재산에 가산한 것이 적법한지에 관하여 살피건대, 갑 제5호증의 2, 제6호증의 각 기재와 당원의 ㅇㅇ은행 ㅇㅇ지점장에 대한 사실조회결과에 변론의 전취지를 모아보면, 아래의 사실들을 인정할 수 있고, 달리 반증이 없다.

(1) 소외 망 강ㅇㅇ는 주소지 인근의 ㅇㅇ은행 ㅇㅇ지점에 1987. 8. 11. 금7,900,000원을 입금하면서 구좌번호 ㅇㅇ호로서 보통예금거래를 시작한 이래 사망하기까지 수시로 금원을 입출금하는 거래를 계속하여 왔고, 상속개시 1년 전인 1989. 10. 17.부터 상속개시일인 1990. 10. 17.까지 사이에 ㅇㅇ은행 ㅇㅇ지점에 개설된 위 망인 명의의 보통예금구좌에서 인출된 금원은 도합 금113,600,000원이다.

(2) 피고는 소외 망 강ㅇㅇ가 인출한 위 금113,600,000원 중 1회 금10,000,000원 이상 4회에 걸쳐 인출된 합계 금47,000,000원(1990. 3. 31. 금10,000,000원, 같은 해 4. 4. 금12,000,000원, 같은 해 6. 15. 금15,000,000원, 같은 해 7. 3. 금10,000,000원)에 대하여 위 망인의 상속재산 가액에 가산하여 이 사건 부과처분을 하였다.

(3) However, through the whole of the above transaction period, the maximum balance of the above transaction period was KRW 20,000,000 as of August 3, 1989, and the balance was continuously exceeded KRW 10,000,000 even for the period of 20,30 months, only once, and there was a large amount of million ordinary balance. The above 4-time withdrawal amount, which the Defendant was subject to taxation, was immediately withdrawn, 2,3 days prior to the said 2,3 days, or even deposited on the date of withdrawal. The balance as of October 17, 1989, which was the first day of the taxable period, was KRW 879,847, and the balance as of October 17, 1990, which was the expiration date of the said period, was KRW 9,531,537 won.

E. Determination

ex officio, the legislative intent of Article 7-2 of the above Inheritance Tax Act is to prevent fears that the decedent would dispose of the property before the commencement of the inheritance in cash and by donation or inheritance to his heir who is not easy to disclose the taxation data, and thus, the property included in the taxable shall be limited to the case where the property existed before the commencement date of the inheritance until the commencement date of the inheritance. Thus, as in the case of this case, the balance of deposits, which was over KRW 879,847 as of the commencement date of the inheritance, has been continuously changed and the funds are continuously deposited and withdrawn after the commencement of the inheritance, and even if the balance was increased to KRW 9,531,357, the remaining amount was raised by the payment of the funds during the above period, and the disposal of the property would be contrary to the logic and legislative intent of the property, and therefore, it would be contrary to the legitimate taxation purpose of the Plaintiff's total amount of KRW 47,00,000,000,000 to KRW 314,5294,0.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, since the part exceeding the amount of inheritance tax and defense tax stated in the separate sheet among the defendant's disposition of this case exceeds the amount of each inheritance tax and defense tax, it is necessary to revoke all of them. However, since the part exceeding the amount of tax stated in the separate sheet prior to remand in the separate sheet is already revoked and finalized in the trial prior to remand, it is so decided as per Disposition by the court of first instance that only the portion exceeding the amount of tax stated in the separate sheet corresponding to the remainder is revoked, and the remaining claims of the plaintiffs are without merit, it is dismissed.