1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

The reasoning for the court’s explanation of this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the dismissal or addition of part of the judgment of the court of first instance as set forth in paragraph (2) below, and thus, this is acceptable in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act. On the sixth or any addition, the “taxable value” in paragraph (9) is deemed as “taxable value”.

Part 6, paragraph 11 shall add to the following:

As to the scope of revocation of a taxation disposition, determination is made depending on whether the amount exceeds the reasonable tax amount. The parties concerned may submit arguments and materials supporting the objective tax base and tax amount until the closing of arguments at the trial court. If legitimate tax amount to be lawfully imposed is calculated based on such materials, only the portion exceeding the legitimate tax amount should be revoked, but in such case, the entire taxation disposition should not be revoked, and in such a case, the court does not have the duty to actively calculate legitimate tax amount ex officio (see Supreme Court Decision 94Nu13527, Apr. 28, 1995). In this case, there is no evidence to calculate the appraised value per share of issued stocks of the company of this case on August 19, 209, which is the base date for assessing the taxable value of the gift tax, and therefore, the judgment of the court below on August 19, 2009 cannot be readily concluded that the assessed value per share of the company of this case is the same and reasonable ground for revocation of the entire appraised value per share under the Inheritance Tax Act.