If there is no transfer margin or final return, legality of imposition of transfer income tax based on the standard market price.

If the actual transaction price is unclear due to the failure to make a preliminary return on the transfer of assets or a final return on tax base, it is legitimate that the defendant (the head of the Jin-gu Tax Office) has imposed tax after deducting necessary expenses after calculating the transfer margin

Articles 23, 95, and 100 of the former Income Tax Act (Act No. 3098, Dec. 5, 1978); Articles 170(3) and 170(4) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act

Supreme Court Decision 77Nu222 delivered on December 27, 197, 79Nu329 delivered on February 26, 1980

[Defendant-Appellee] Plaintiff 1 and 3 others, Counsel for defendant-appellee

Head of Jinju Tax Office

Daegu High Court Decision 82Gu233 delivered on May 31, 1983

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

According to the court below's determination, since the deceased non-party 1, who is the deceased non-party 4, 1, 2, and 3, purchased 101 Hobbbes ( Address omitted) from non-party 2 on October 4, 1978 and transferred to non-party 3 on September 12, 1979, and did not make a preliminary return or final return on the transfer of assets under Article 95 or 100 of the Income Tax Act, which was enforced at the time of transfer to non-party 3 on September 12, 1979, after deducting necessary expenses according to the standard market price so that the defendant was unclear. According to Article 23 (4) of the Income Tax Act, the transfer value shall be calculated based on the standard market price at the time of transfer, and if the actual transaction price is unclear, the transfer value shall be determined based on the standard market price at the time of transfer of assets and the amount calculated based on the standard market price at the time of transfer under Article 170 (3) of the same Act.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of the appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Lee Chang-chul (Presiding Justice)