logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2017.12.21 2017누74346
증여세부과처분취소소송
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows, and the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment, except for the addition of the judgment of the plaintiff's appellate brief by adding or adding some contents of the judgment of the court of first instance to the following, and thus, it shall be cited by the main text of Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article

"E" in the second seven pages of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be read as "B".

According to the evidence No. 5 of the judgment of the court of first instance, the following is added to the 5th line "(B) of the judgment of the court of first instance. Of the instant inheritors, H, F, and G, the inheritor except the Plaintiff, prepared a confirmation letter that "after the deceased B died on May 31, 1993, the Plaintiff agreed to the sole inheritance of the instant trust shares." However, the Plaintiff’s assertion as to additional assertion of the Plaintiff’s appeal is subject to division of inherited property, and the co-inheritors may consult on division of inherited property at any time. As such, it should be deemed that there was an agreement on division of inherited property between the instant inheritors as at the time when the amount remaining after the deduction of transfer income tax of the instant trust shares reverts to the Plaintiff. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s disposal of the instant trust shares is unlawful as the transfer proceeds under the premise that the heir did not reach an agreement on division among the heirs’s inherited property (property No. 2. 1 of this case).

arrow