Since the Plaintiff received money equivalent to the purchase price of the instant land from his father, the disposition of this case is legitimate.

It is difficult to recognize that the land was purchased with the funds of the spouse.

Article 4 of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act

Daejeon District Court 2016Guhap101937

OO

OO Head of the tax office

2, 2016.22

November 24, 2016

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff’s father died on June 5, 2003, and the Plaintiff, CCC, and DD inherited the property of AA, which are the wife and children of AA.

B. After conducting an inheritance tax investigation on the inherited property, etc. of AA from August 30, 2013 to October 11, 2013, the Director of the Statistics Korea notified the Defendant of taxation data with the following purport:

C. Accordingly, on December 10, 2013, the Defendant: (a) determined and notified gift tax on the Plaintiff on October 2, 1999; (b) KRW OO on the donation portion; and (c) KRW OO on July 18, 200 (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 5, Eul evidence 1 to 5 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The 1/2 shares out of the O-dong O are purchased from the Plaintiff’s husband’s account with the OO's source deposited on September 4, 1999. The 1/4 shares out of the O-dong O-O-O-O-O-O-O were purchased from the money that the EE received from the customer, DD, EE, etc. while engaging in the building business. In other words, the Plaintiff purchased each of the above land shares (hereinafter “each of the instant land shares”) with the money of the E-E-O-O, and did not purchase the money donated by AA, the instant disposition was unlawful.

(b) Fact of recognition;

1) On October 1, 1984, AAA purchased O-Dong O-dong O-dong O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-Ma-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-use land of this case (hereinafter referred to as "the

2) As above, AA owned the land of this case and suffered dementia from around 1997.

3) On September 1, 1999, the Plaintiff, BB, CCC, and DD, a family member of AA, sold the instant land to OO Co., Ltd. and received OO(hereinafter referred to as “the sales price of the instant case”).

4) The Plaintiff, BB, CCC, and DD purchased land as follows and completed the registration of ownership transfer as the sales price of this case.

A) Around October 2, 1999, an O-dong O-dong O-dong O-dong O-dong O-dong O-dong O-dong O-O land was purchased in the aggregate of O-O land and completed the registration of transfer of ownership in the name of the Plaintiff and DDD with respect to the O-dong O land on November 5, 199 with respect to the O-dong O-dong O land, and with respect to each of 1/2 shares of the Plaintiff and DD with respect to each of the O-dong O-O land.

B) Around April 20, 200, O-O O-O o-O o-O o o-O o-O o-O o-O o-O o-O o-O o-O o-O o-O O o-O o-O o-O o-O o-O o-O o-O o-O o-O o- o-O o-2 4,063/4,162 shares out of the O o-O O o-O o-O o-O o-O o-O o-O o-O o-O o-O o-O o o-O o

C) Around April 28, 200, an O-Eup O-type O-type O-type O-type purchase of 5,586/6,586 shares out of the above land on June 29, 200 and completed each registration for the transfer of ownership in the name of BB, 1,000/6,586 shares in the name of CCC.

D) Around July 10, 200, an O-dong O-dong O-dong O-dong O-car Om2, such as O-Om2, purchased O-Om2 in O-O(s) and completed the registration of transfer of ownership in the name of BB around September 18, 200.

E) On July 18, 200, after purchasing O-O land from O-O on or around July 18, 200, the Plaintiff, BB, CCC, and DD completed each registration of ownership transfer in the name of the Plaintiff, BB, CCC, and DD with respect to each of the above land around September 18, 200.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 8, 17, and Eul evidence 3 to 7;

The purport of all pleadings

C. Determination

The above facts, the evidence and the purport of the entire pleadings are as follows: ① purchasing real estate and completing the registration of transfer of ownership as above with the sale price of this case can be seen as attributable to the purpose of distributing the property of AAA before the death of AA; ② it is insufficient to recognize that the above evidence and the entries of Nos. 9 through No. 16, 18, and 19 with the money of the EA as alleged by the Plaintiff were purchased with the money of the Plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to recognize otherwise; rather, the Plaintiff acquired the share of each land of this case with the money of BB, CCC, and DD with the money of the sales price of this case; ③ the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff acquired the share of each land of this case with the money of the purchase price of each land of this case; ④ the Plaintiff did not provide the money corresponding to the purchase price of each share of this case with the money of this case, and thus, the Plaintiff acquired the share of this case with the money of this case as the purchase price of each land of this case.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and it is so ordered as per Disposition.

shall be ruled.