beta
Text
1.(a)
On May 1, 2014, the head of New Mine Tax Office imposed a gift tax of KRW 286,890,820 on the Plaintiff A.
Reasons
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On January 31, 201, the representative F of E (hereinafter “E”) held the title trust of 2,750 shares issued by E (i.e., face value 10,000 won per share; hereinafter “instant shares”) with the Plaintiff, one of its own ASEAN, and 25,000 shares of the instant shares to Plaintiff B, the former wife of his/her divorce on August 11, 201, and 14,000 shares of the instant shares to the Plaintiff on October 1, 201, and 20,000 shares of the instant shares to the Plaintiff, who was its own wife on October 1, 201.
B. In addition, on January 31, 201, Plaintiff D, a partner of F, calculated the amount of KRW 10,000 per share of the instant 2,750 to F, and transferred the total amount of KRW 27,50,000 per share to F.
C. According to the supplementary evaluation method under Article 54 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 23527, Jan. 25, 2012; hereinafter “Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act”), the Defendants assessed the value per share of the instant stocks as indicated in the “value per share” in attached Table 2 1 of the attached Table 2, and on this basis, on May 1, 2014, the head of the Sincheon District Tax Office imposed the gift tax on the Plaintiff A; the head of the Sincheon District Tax Office imposed the gift tax on the Plaintiff B and C on the same day pursuant to Article 45-2 of the former Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 11130, Dec. 31, 2011; hereinafter “The Inheritance Tax Act”).
The Defendants applied the penalty tax rate of 40% on the premise that the above Plaintiffs did not report the tax base in an unfair manner.
In addition, the director of the tax office having jurisdiction over the instant shares transferred at a low price the Plaintiff D transferred the instant shares to F who is a specially related person, and thus, the transfer value reported by the Plaintiff D is denied, and the supplementary evaluation methods under Article 63 of the former Inheritance and Gift Act and Article 54 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Act are followed.