Seoul High Court 2011Nu38294 (Law No. 18, 2012)

Cho High Court Decision 2010Du2052 ( December 01, 2010)

(D) The imposition of capital gains tax and gift tax at the time of low-price transfer between persons with a special relationship does not violate the double taxation prohibition principle.

(C) If the transfer income tax is imposed on the transferor by applying the provision of wrongful calculation at the time of the transfer of the property between persons with a special relationship, the transfer income tax is imposed on the transferor and the transferee is imposed on the same taxable capacity under the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act, the double taxation is not contrary to the principle of prohibition of double taxation.

Article 101 of the Income Tax Act

Article 35 of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act

2012Du10932 Revocation of Disposition of Imposing capital gains tax, etc.

Kim XX et al.

Head of the Cheongju Tax Office and one other

Seoul High Court Decision 2011Nu38294 Decided April 18, 2012

All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Although examining all of the records of this case, the judgment of the court below and the grounds of appeal, it is evident that the appellant’s grounds of appeal fall under Article 4 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure of Appeal, and therefore, all appeals are dismissed under Article 5 of the same Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent

Reference materials.

If the grounds for final appeal are not included in the grounds of appeal that make it appropriate for the court of final appeal to become a legal trial, such as matters concerning significant violation of Acts and subordinate statutes, etc., the system of final appeal will not continue to proceed with the deliberation on the merits of the grounds for final appeal, but will not proceed with the deliberation on the merits of the grounds for final