Cho-2017-China-1512 (Law No. 15, 2017)

Whether a disposition to correct the gift tax by applying the supplementary evaluation method under the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act is justifiable because it is difficult to calculate the market price of stocks at issue.

In addition, since there are no other data that can be seen as the market price of the instant shares, it is reasonable to evaluate the instant shares by applying the supplementary evaluation method under the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act, since the instant shares are difficult to calculate the market

Article 60 of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act, etc.

Incheon District Court-2017-Gu 53631 (Law No. 17, 2018)

EO

O Head of tax office

2018.04.26

oly 2018.17

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

원고는 2015. 9. 30. 아버지인 ○○○로부터 비상장주식인 ★★금속 주식회사(이하 '★★금속'이라 한다)의 주식 3,000주(이하 '이 사건 주식'이라 한다)를 증여받았다고 하

Meanwhile, on December 31, 2015, the taxable value of the gift tax is KRW 00,000,000 per share ( KRW 00,000 per share x 3,000 per share) and the gift tax was returned and paid on December 31, 2015. The Defendant applied the supplementary assessment method under Articles 60(3) and 63(1)1(c) of the former Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act (amended by Act No. 14388, Dec. 20, 2016; hereinafter “Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act”) by deeming that it is difficult to calculate the market value of the shares of this case, and the value per share of the shares of this case was assessed as KRW 00,00,00 by deeming that the taxable value of the gift tax of the shares of this case was under-reported, and thus, decided and notified the Plaintiff on January 5, 2017 (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The plaintiff's assertion

1) ★★금속이 2012. 6. 30. 설립된 법인으로 다액의 자금 차입을 통한 시설투자를 한 점, 그 시설투자에 따른 사업성과가 불확실한 점 등 여러 사정을 고려하면, 원고가 증여세 신고 당시 이 사건 주식의 1주당 가격으로 산정한 00,000원은 이 사건 주식의 정상적인 교환가치가 적정하게 반영된 것이므로, 이 사건 주식의 시가를 산정하기 어려운 것으로 보아 상속세및증여세법상의 보충적 평가방법에 기초하여 이루어진 이 사건 처분은 위법하다.

2) The time when the Plaintiff donated the instant shares from ○○○○ to the Plaintiff was not on September 30, 2015, but on March 31, 2015, before the Plaintiff entered the Gun, which was not on September 30, 2015, and thus, the instant disposition was unlawful regarding the donation date of the instant shares as on September 30, 2015.

3) ○○○○ is not a donation of the instant shares to the Plaintiff, but a title trust was made without the purpose of tax avoidance. In such a case, the provision on deemed donation of title trust property is not applicable, and thus, the instant disposition imposing gift tax on the Plaintiff is unlawful.

(b) Related statutes;

It is as shown in the attached Form.

C. Determination

1) As to the market price of the instant shares

Article 60(1) and (3) of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act provides that the value of the property on which the gift tax is levied shall be based on the market price as of the date of donation, and where it is difficult to calculate the market price, it shall be based on the supplementary assessment method as provided in Articles 61 through 65 of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act. Article 60(2) of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act provides that the market price in this context means an objective exchange price formed through a general and normal transaction with many and unspecified persons. Thus, if the subject matter of donation is unlisted stocks, it shall be deemed difficult to calculate the market price, and the value thereof may be calculated according to the supplementary assessment method as provided in Article 63(1)1 (c) of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2003Du5723, Oct. 15, 204). The Plaintiff’s share price per share as at the time of the return of the gift tax is without any objective basis, and the Plaintiff’s shares exchange rate of 000 won or more.

Since there is no evidence to view the market price of the instant shares as the market price, the instant shares constitute cases where it is difficult to calculate the market price.

Therefore, the disposition of this case by calculating the value per share of the instant shares as a supplementary assessment method under Article 63(1)1 (c) of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act is lawful.

2) As to the donation date of the instant shares

갑 제4 내지 6호증의 기재에 변론 전체의 취지로부터 알 수 있는 다음과 같은 사정들, 즉 ① 원고는 군 입대 전에 아버지인 ○○○와 이 사건 주식을 증여받는 것에 관하여 논의하고, 이 사건 주식의 증여에 관한 처리를 ○○○에게 전적으로 위임한 채 군에 입대한 것으로 보이는 점, ② ○○○는 2015. 1.경부터 ★★금속의 세무업무를 맡고 있는 회계사무소에 이 사건 주식을 증여하는 경우와 명의신탁하는 경우의 증여세액이 어느 정도인지, 이 사건 주식을 증여한다면 그 시기를 언제로 하는 것이유리인지 등에 관하여 상담한 점, ③ 원고는 2015. 12. 31. ○○○를 통하여 이 사건 주식의 증여에 따른 증여세를 신고하면서 원고와 ○○○가 2015. 9. 30. 이 사건 주식에 관하여 증여계약을 체결하였다는 내용의 주식 증여계약서를 제출한 점 등을 종합하여 보면, ○○○는 원고로부터 이 사건 주식의 증여에 관한 처리를 전적으로 위임받은 상태에서 세금 절감 측면에서 가장 유리한 시점으로 판단한 2015. 9. 30. 원고에게 이 사건 주식을 증여하는 의사를 표시하고, 그 무렵 ○○○와 원고 사이에 이 사건 주식의 증여에 관한 의사의 합치가 있었다고 봄이 타당하므로, 이 사건 주식의 증여일을 2015. 9. 30.로 보아 이루어진 이 사건 처분은 적법하다(이와 같이 ○○○가 원고에게 이 사건 주식을 증여하였음이 인정되는 이상, 이 사건 주식이 조세회피의 목적 없이 명의신탁된 것임을 전제로 이 사건 처분이 위법하다는 원고의 주장은 받아들이기 어렵다).

3. Conclusion

The plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.