Whether the property of the deceased's borrowed account is included

The deposit account of this case shall be included in the taxable value of inherited property, the amount of which the use is not verified among the withdrawn amount to the heir's borrowed name account.

Article 15 (Presumption of Inheritance of Property Subject to Disposition before Commencement of Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax)

1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

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

The decision of the first instance court shall be revoked. Each part exceeding 435,128,690 won of the imposition of joint and several tax liability of KRW 927,893,153 against the plaintiffs on November 15, 2004 by the defendant shall be revoked.

1. Details of taxation; and

A. The Plaintiffs reported and paid KRW 56,570,515 to the Defendant on April 30, 2003 as the heir, when ○○○○○ died on November 1, 2002.

B. From March 28, 2004 to August 28, 2004, the ○○ Regional Tax Office conducted a large amount of inheritance tax investigation, and notified the Defendant that the Plaintiffs included in the taxable value of inheritance tax and imposed inheritance tax, by deeming that the Plaintiffs’ amount of KRW 76,945,137, insurance money, KRW 337,75,151, and the amount of deposit interest in the amount of KRW 509,643,691, prior donated property 1,53,589,28, among the taxable value of inheritance.

[Ban 1] The amount of deposit withdrawal within two years, whose purpose is unclear

Deposit Shares

Withdrawal Amount

Amount of confirmation of place of use

Unspecified Use Amount

643,831,732 won

488,334,892 won

155,496,840 won

sexual intercourse ○

851,930,566 won

497,783,715 won

354,146,851 won

Total

1,495,762,298 won

986,118,607 won

509,643,691 won

C. Accordingly, on November 15, 2004, the Defendant deducted the total amount of the inheritance tax calculated, including the taxable value of the inherited property omitted to the Plaintiffs, from KRW 556,570,515, and imposed an assessment and assessment of KRW 927,893,153 of the inheritance tax (hereinafter “instant taxation”).

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisf

2. Whether the instant taxation disposition is legitimate

A. The plaintiffs' assertion

The instant taxation disposition is unlawful for the following reasons.

(1) The Defendant: (a) deemed ○○○○ Bank in the name of Plaintiff ○○○○○○○○○○○, the wife’s wife, as a borrowed-name account in which the inheritee’s benefits, etc. are deposited; and (b) imposed the instant tax disposition, including KRW 4,934,498, which was the balance of the said account at the commencement of inheritance as at the commencement of inheritance, in the taxable value of inherited property; (c) however, even under the Act on Real Name Financial Transactions and Confidentiality (hereinafter “Act on Real Name Financial Transactions”), the instant deposit account is a deposit account opened by Plaintiff ○○○○○, which receives money for living expenses from the inheritee; and (d) even under the Act on Real Name Financial Transactions and Confidentiality, the deposit of the instant deposit account is the Plaintiff ○○○○, and thus, the instant deposit account is not a borrowed-name account of the inheritee.

(2) The Defendant considered KRW 336,259,911 as the inherited property of the inheritee and imposed the instant taxation. However, the above insurance money was paid to the remainder after having concluded an insurance contract and saving living expenses, etc. received from the inheritee, and it was not inherited property due to maturity or early termination.

(3) The Defendant imposed the instant tax disposition, including the taxable value of inherited property, of KRW 509,643,691, which is unclear among the amounts withdrawn for two (2) years from all the deposit accounts of the inheritee including the instant deposit account. However, since the instant deposit account is not a borrowed account of the inheritee, the amount withdrawn from the account should be excluded from the disposal property of the inheritee before the commencement of inheritance. Of the amount withdrawn before the commencement of inheritance from the deposit account under the name of the inheritee, the amount of KRW 291,220,131, out of the amount withdrawn before the commencement of inheritance, shall not be included in the taxable value of inherited property. Thus, the amount purely withdrawn from the deposit account of the inheritee does not exceed KRW 352,61,601, total amount of KRW 352,61,601, and thus, it shall not be included in the taxable value of inherited property.

B. Relevant statutes

Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act

Article 1 (Inheritance Tax Taxables)

(1) In case where, owing to inheritance [including a testamentary gift, a donation becoming effective due to the death of a donor (including the relevant donation in case where the donor is deceased during the performance of the donation obligation under Article 14 (1) 3; hereinafter the same shall apply), and a divisional donation of inherited property to a special relative under Article 1057-2 of the Civil Act; hereinafter the same shall apply], there exists inherited property on the commencement date of inheritance (referring to the day on which inheritance is declared missing in case where inheritance commences due to the declaration of disappearance; hereinafter the same shall apply), falling under one of the following subparagraphs as of the first day of inheritance, in respect

1. In cases of the death of a person who has established a domicile in the Republic of Korea or has established a temporary domicile in the Republic of Korea for not less than one year (hereinafter referred to as a "resident"), all of the resident's inherited property (including property bequeathed by an ancestor and donated property becoming effective due to the death

Article 7 (Scope of Inherited Property)

(1) The inherited property under Article 1 shall include the property belonging to the inheritee, which is all articles having economic value capable of realization into money and all de facto or de facto rights having property value.

Article 8 (Insurance Money Regarded as Inherited Property)

(1) Insurance money of life or non-life insurance received due to the death of an ancestor, which is received by the ancestor according to an insurance contract that has become a policyholder, shall be considered

(2) Where a policyholder has actually paid a premium even though the decedent was a person other than the decedent, the decedent shall be deemed a policyholder and the provisions of paragraph (1) shall apply.

Article 15 (Presumption of Inheritance of Property Disposed of Prior to Commencement Date of Inheritance)

(1) Where an ancestor disposes of the property or bears an obligation of the ancestor and falls under any of the following subparagraphs, it shall be presumed that he/she succeeds to such property and pursuant to Article 13:

It shall be included in the taxable amount of inheritance taxes.

1. Where the amount obtained by disposing of the property of an ancestor or withdrawn from the property of the ancestor is not less than 200 million won by the type of property within one year before the date inheritance commences, and where the use is not less than 500 million won by the type of property within two years before the date inheritance commences, and

(3) The calculation of the amount, etc. received or withdrawn from the property under paragraph (1) 1 by disposal of the property and the classification by kind of property shall be prescribed by Presidential Decree.

Enforcement Decree of Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act

Article 11 (Scope of Property or Debt Included in Taxable Amount of Inheritance Taxes)

(1) In applying Article 15 (1) 1 of the Act, the disposal amount and the withdrawn amount of property shall be the sum of the amounts calculated according to the classification in each of the following subparagraphs for each type of property:

1. Where an ancestor disposes of property, an amount actually earned within one or two years before the date inheritance commences, out of the amount disposed of by the ancestor;

2. Where the decedent has withdrawn money, etc. (hereafter in this Article, referred to as “money, etc.”) from the inherited property, the money, etc. actually withdrawn within one or two years prior to the date on which the inheritance commences. In this case, where the relevant money, etc. has been deposited through the passbook or the truster’s account, etc. as prescribed by the Ordinance of the Ministry of Finance and Economy, it shall be such money, etc. as calculated by deducting the aggregate of money, etc. deposited during the relevant period from the aggregate of such money, etc. withdrawn within one or two years prior to the date on

(2) The term "where the purposes of use is not objectively clear as prescribed by Presidential Decree" in Article 15 (1) 1 and 2 of the Act means cases falling under any of the following subparagraphs:

1. Where the other party to a transaction who has paid the amount received by an ancestor from disposing of the property or the money, etc. withdrawn from the property of the ancestor or the amount borne by the ancestor, and the other party to the transaction who has paid the received money (hereafter in this Article, referred to

2. Where the fact of receiving money, etc. is not denied by the opposite contractual party, or the fact of receiving money, etc. is not recognized in light of financial status

3. Where a person who has a special relationship with an inheritee under Article 26 (4) is not recognized by social norms;

4. Where other assets acquired by the predecessor with money, etc. received by him/her are not verified;

5. Where disbursement is not recognized in light of the age, occupation, career, income, property status, etc. of the inheritee;

(5) The term “property by category” in Article 15 (1) 1 of the Act means those as classified in the following subparagraphs:

1. Cash, deposits, and securities;

Enforcement Regulations of Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act

"The head of a Tong or a truster account, etc. prescribed by Ordinance of the Ministry of Finance and Economy" in Article 11 (1) 2 of the Decree means a document with which the facts of continuous and repeated financial transactions and the details of such transactions can be verified through financial institutions.

(c) Fact of recognition;

(1) On November 1, 1990, the Plaintiff Sung-○ opened the instant deposit account as the occupational master book, and was re-issued by the passbook on August 8, 1995, and thereafter issued the passbook on January 7, 1997, starting with frequent entry and departure transactions, and thereafter, it was re-issued by the passbook on January 7, 1997. The more frequent transactions have been made thereafter, and it was re-issued on March 4, 2002.

(2) Major deposit and withdrawal transactions in the instant deposit account consist of: (a) the decedent’s payment and withdrawal of money equivalent to the premium, as follows.

(A) From September 30, 1995, the Defendant’s salary began to have been deposited into the instant deposit account. Before that, the transaction was conducted on the account transfer of a few hundred thousand won amount of life insurance premium and the payment of urban gas and integrated public charges. The balance was almost KRW 00,000 won.

(B) However, the monthly salary of the inheritee, which exceeds KRW 5,00,000, began to be deposited into the instant deposit account, and the amount equivalent to KRW 6,000,000 was withdrawn from KRW 2,000 per month, and the place of use of the withdrawn amount is unclear.

(C) Meanwhile, from May 200 to April 11, 200, 4,958,376 won was deposited in the name of the decedent, the Plaintiff’s sex ○○, ○○○○, and ○○○○○○, etc., and most of ○○ Life Insurance’s insurance premiums (4,958,376 won + 1,00,000 won + 2,00,000 + 40,000 + + 757,420 won + 382,536 won + 418,420 won +) were deposited in the name of the decedent and the Plaintiff’s name began on April 10, 201, and continued to continue to continue to continue to exist after May 10, 200.

(D) The amount deposited in the name of the Plaintiff U.S.○○○ is KRW 125,950,000 in total on seven occasions except for the amount deposited in relation to the above insurance premium.

(E) The insurance premium received by the Plaintiff Sung-○ was paid with the money in the instant deposit account, and the monthly payment was made by account transfer in the case of savings insurance other than that, or was paid with the refund received after the termination of the previous savings insurance.

(F) The Plaintiff ○○ does not know well the details of the entry and departure of the instant deposit account.

(3) The details of the preparation of the certificate (No. 2)

(A) The Plaintiff’s inheritance tax report received the help of Kim○-○ who was in charge of accounting affairs in ○○○, a corporation in which the decedent had been operated by the certified public accountant delegated by him.

(B) On September 1, 2004, a public official in charge of the inheritance tax investigation of ○○ regional tax office visited ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ on the same day, in order to verify the details and evidence of the donation of the inheritee who was the head of ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○, but the Plaintiff’s Sung○○○○○○○○○○○ on the same day, and the Plaintiff’s Sung○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ was a borrowed account of the inheritee and received

(C) At the time, the Plaintiff ○○ was approaching the same day as the next day, and the ○○○ was also the relation that was the new one, and thereafter, was about about 20 minutes. In that place, the Plaintiff ○○, ○○, ○○○, and the Plaintiff ○○, a certified public accountant, and the Plaintiff ○○, who was in contact, was present at the same time, in addition to ○○○, ○○, ○, and ○.

(D) After having exchanged, the ○○○ demanded the signature of the Plaintiff Sung-○○○ by taking out the instant confirmation form, and thus, the competent ○○○○○ certified public accountant first confirmed the contents of the instant confirmation. After that, Kim○○, the Plaintiff Ui-○, and Sung-○, in sequence, deemed the Plaintiff Sung○○ to be in order.

The signature was signed in the confirmation document.

(4) Details of withdrawal

The amount deposited from the deposited account of the inheritee and the deposited account of this case within two years prior to the commencement of inheritance of this case is KRW 643,831,732,00 (Provided, That 291,220,131 out of this case is the amount transferred from the account under the name of the inheritee to another account under the name of another decedent, and thus, the net withdrawal amount is KRW 352,61,601), 851,930,566. Of these, the amount verified by the place of use is KRW 488,34,892 (including KRW 291,220,131 of the above account transfer amount), KRW 497,783,715, and the amount whose purpose is unclear is KRW 155,496,840,354,86,851, respectively.

On the other hand, there is money deposited in each of the above accounts for the two years, but it is an amount created separately regardless of the amount of the above withdrawal.

[Ground of recognition] Evidence No. 1, Evidence No. 2, Evidence No. 3-1 through 11, Evidence No. 7-1 through 9, Evidence No. 8-1 through 7, Evidence No. 2, Evidence No. 2, Evidence No. 1 to 1, Part of Evidence No. 3, Evidence No. 1 to 3, and the purport of whole pleadings by the court of first instance.

D. Determination

(1) Since a financial institution after the enforcement of the Act on the Registration of Real Name Financial Transactions, it is deemed that the deposit account holder is the deposit account holder unless there is an explicit or implied agreement between the deposit account holder and the financial institution to vest the claim for the return of deposits in the person who is not the deposit account. However, in this case, as seen earlier, the statement of transactions in the deposit account of this case and the contents of the confirmation document of this case (the plaintiffs' statement of intent by ○○ and ○○○ upon the confirmation document of this case is alleged to be cancelled because it is merely because ○○ and ○○ would make less payment of inheritance tax by mistake or mistake. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge otherwise, it is difficult to believe that some testimony by ○○○○○ witness of the first instance court to the purport corresponding thereto is difficult, and it is difficult to accept the above assertion by taking into account the fact that Plaintiff 1 and ○○○○○ was actually a deposit account in the name of the deceased, as well as the remaining amount of money deposited in the deposit account of this case.

(2) In addition, if the deposit account of this case is recognized as the borrowed name account of the inheritee, the amount withdrawn from the deposit account of this case shall also be included in the above amount. The aggregate of the amount withdrawn from the deposit account of the inheritee, including the deposit account of this case, within 2 years prior to the date of commencing the inheritance, shall be included in the above amount. The aggregate of the amount withdrawn from the deposit account of the inheritee including the deposit account of this case (=352,61,601 +851,601 +851,530,566) is the amount which exceeds 50 million won subject to the verification of the use under Article 15(1)1 of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act. As such, the above 509,643,691 won is revealed to be unclear as it exceeds the amount subject to the verification of use under Article 15(1)1 of the Inheritance Tax

(3) Therefore, the instant taxation disposition is lawful, and the Plaintiffs’ claim of this case is without merit, and all of them should be dismissed.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the judgment of the court of first instance is just and without merit, and all appeals by the plaintiffs are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.

* Note *

1) The Plaintiff’s primary reasons