Suwon District Court 2010Guhap17558 (O7, 2011)

early 2010 Heavy2328 ( October 28, 2010)

Where justifiable grounds exist, gift tax following transfer of high-value shall be illegal.

In light of the explicit recognition of the concept of listing interest by imposing gift tax on a person who gains profits from listing, etc., the high-priced transfer is a transaction made at a price for transferring the status of a KOSDAQ-listed corporation and there is a justifiable reason under the transactional practice, and thus, the imposition of gift tax is unlawful.

2011Nu35059 Revocation of Disposition of Imposition of Gift Tax, etc.

Maximum XX 2 others

2. One other than the director of the Daegu Tax Office

Suwon District Court Decision 2010Guhap17558 Decided September 7, 2011

January 18, 2012

March 7, 2012

1. All appeals filed by the Defendants are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

3. On April 23, 2010, the order of the first instance court was corrected as "No. 1-A, 2010." and "No. 1-B, 21, 2010." as "No. 6, 2010."

1. Purport of claim

On April 23, 2010 (which was written in the Director of the District Tax Office, hereinafter referred to as "the gift tax on April 21, 2010"), which was paid to the Plaintiff LA for 2005, the amount of 27,435,50 won and 180,230,640 won and the gift tax on April 6, 2010 for 205, 591,258,30 won and 20,126,970 won (the portion of gift tax on the deceased KimB), the amount of 7,321,690 won for the gift tax on 205 to the Plaintiff LA, and the amount of 9,672,240 won for the gift tax on 206 to the Plaintiff, and the amount of 205 D and 2508 won for the gift tax on 205, the amount of 205 D and 4010 for the Plaintiff.

2. Purport of appeal

The judgment of the first instance is revoked. The plaintiffs' claims are dismissed in entirety.

The reasons for the judgment of this court are as follows: "I will refer to "I will make a second and second step below"; "I will refer to "I will make a third third and fourth step"; "I will refer to "I will make a third and seventh step" to "I will take April 21, 2010" into consideration "I will take April 23, 2010 to "I will make a third and third step"; "I will accept "I will make a third step" to "I will make a third step" to "I will make a second and third step" to "I will make a second decision"; therefore, I will refer to the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance except for adding "I will add "I will make a second and third step" to "I will make a second decision to I will accept" under Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act."

The Defendants asserts that the transfer price of the instant shares does not have the nature of transferring the management right of a KOSDAQ-listed corporation, and that there is no justifiable reason for the transfer price of the instant shares to exceed the market price. However, the purpose of the contract is to acquire the management right of the instant shares (Article 1) and that the contract on the transfer of the management right of the transferor (Article 7) is to acquire the management right of the KOSDAQ-listed corporation. In light of the nature of the transfer of the instant shares and the fact that the accounting corporation and the attorney participated in the process of transferring the instant shares and calculated the transfer price, the transfer price of the instant shares should be deemed to be justifiable in that the transfer price of the instant shares exceeds the market price of the relevant shares.

The judgment of the court of first instance is justifiable. All appeals filed by the Defendants are dismissed. However, since "No. 21 April 2010" of the judgment of the court of first instance is erroneous, "No. 23 April 2010" and "No. 21 April 2010" of the judgment of the court of first instance is corrected as "No. 1-B. 2010. 6 April 2010."