In appraisal of the value of real estate which is inherited property, appraisal value shall be deemed market value.

The example of transaction presented by the plaintiff is not adopted as the market price at the market price, but the appraisal value applied for appraisal by the court at the market price should be deemed as the market price and the inheritance tax base should be corrected.

Article 60 (General Principles, etc. of Appraisal)

1. The Defendant’s imposition disposition of KRW 542,236,795 against the Plaintiffs on February 19, 2004, which exceeds KRW 505,474,970, among the imposition disposition of KRW 542,236,795, shall be revoked.

2. Of the costs of lawsuit, 2/3 shall be borne by the Plaintiffs, and 1/3 by the Defendant, respectively.

The Defendant’s revocation of the part exceeding KRW 349,188,780 of the imposition of KRW 542,236,795 of the inheritance tax for the year 2003 against the Plaintiffs on February 19, 2004 (the purport of the Plaintiff’s claim is to revoke the part equivalent to KRW 156,286,190 of the imposition of KRW 542,236,795 of the above inheritance tax that the Defendant issued against the Plaintiffs is to request the revocation of the part equivalent to KRW 156,286,1

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On February 24, 2003, the non-party 1 deceased on the part of the deceased on February 24, 2003, the plaintiff Kim ○, his children, including the land and buildings listed in the separate sheet among the inherited property (hereinafter "the real property of this case"), and the plaintiff Kim △△△△ received deposits, respectively.

B. On August 22, 2003, Plaintiff Kim ○○ sold the instant real estate at KRW 650,000,000, but the down payment of KRW 60,000,000 on the date of the contract, and the intermediate payment of KRW 400,000,000 on September 22, 2003, the sales contract was prepared to pay the remainder of KRW 190,000,000 on October 1, 2003, and received KRW 60,000 on the day, but returned KRW 60,00,000 on May 17, 200 without receiving the intermediate payment and the remainder.

C. On August 23, 2003, the Plaintiffs considered KRW 650,000,000 as the market price of the instant real estate under the said sales contract as the market price of the instant real estate, and subsequently filed an inheritance tax return with the value of the entire inherited property as KRW 2,362,085,012.

D. On February 19, 2004, the Defendant recognized that the purchase price of KRW 650,000,00 as stated in the above sales contract cannot be deemed as the market price of the real estate at the time of inheritance, and then determined the standard market price of KRW 961,584,830 (individual publication of land + KRW 429,240,00 + 532,34,830 of the standard market price of the building + the difference between the reported amount and the inheritance tax base of the real estate, and included KRW 31,584,830 in the inherited property. In addition, the Defendant determined the amount of KRW 29,920,104 (Plaintiff Kim○-○6,498,219 + KRW 23,421,85) including the inherited property, and imposed the amount of tax upon the Plaintiffs after deducting the amount of tax to be paid by the Plaintiffs.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2, 3, Eul evidence 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiffs' assertion

Although the contract for the sale of the instant real estate was rescinded, as long as the contract for the sale of the instant real estate was concluded at KRW 650,000,000, the inheritance tax should be calculated by recognizing it as the market price. Nevertheless, the Defendant’s misunderstanding of the fact that the above sale price was the market price, and instead taking the standard market price as the inheritance tax base is unlawful. Even if the above sale price cannot be recognized as the market price, the appraisal price of the instant real estate, which was appraised by the Plaintiffs’ request to two reliable appraisal agencies, constitutes the market price, and thus, constitutes the market price. Therefore, the Defendant’s disposal of the instant

B. Relevant statutes

Attached Documents

C. Determination

(1) In imposing inheritance tax, the term "market price at the time of inheritance" means, in principle, an objective exchange price formed through normal transactions, but it includes an objective and reasonable appraised price, so even if there is no exchange price through transactions, the reliable appraisal institution's appraisal price may also be deemed as the market price. However, in order to regard the above appraisal price as the market price, the appraisal price shall be deemed as the market price. However, in order to regard the above appraisal price as the market price, it should be recognized that the appraisal was properly conducted and evaluated in an objective and reasonable manner (see Supreme Court Decision 2001Du6029, May 30, 2003).

(2) First, according to the provisions of Article 60 (1) and (2) of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act, and Article 49 (1) 1 of the former Enforcement Decree of the same Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 18177 of Dec. 30, 2003), if there is a transaction of the pertinent property during a period of not more than 6 months before and after the commencement of the inheritance, the transaction value shall be the market price and the inheritance tax base may be the property tax amount. In this case, the plaintiffs ○○ prepared a sales contract for the instant real property with △△△△△△△△△△, with the sales price of 650,000 won, while the sales contract was terminated without payment of intermediate payment and balance, the full return of the purchase price was made as the contract price at the expiration of 7 months after the remainder payment date cannot be deemed as falling under the above provision of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act, and therefore, the plaintiffs' assertion that the above contract constitutes the pertinent part of the sale price.

(3) 다음으로 원고들이 공신력 있는 감정기관 2곳에 의뢰하여 평가한 감정결과를 시가로 볼 수 있는지 여부에 관하여 보건대, 갑제7, 8호증의 각 기재 및 이 법원의 주식회사 ◇◇감정평가법인 및 건축사 정○○에 대한 감정평가촉탁결과에 의하면, 원고들이 이 사건 부동산의 시가에 관하여 주식회사 ◇◇감정평가법인 및 주식회사 ✡✡감정평가법인에 감정평가를 의뢰하여 실시한 감정평가결과 및 이 법원의 촉탁에 의한 주식회사 ◇◇감정평가법인의 감정평가결과와 이 사건 부동산 중 건물 부분에 대한 이 법원의 촉탁에 의한 건축사 정○○의 감정평가 결과는 아래의 표와 같다.

(ju) △ Appraisal Corporation

(Request of Plaintiffs)

(주)✡✡감정평가법인

(Request of Plaintiffs)

(ju) △ Appraisal Corporation

(A) the commission of the court

Certified architect Ma

(the commission of this Court)

Time of Assessment

August 22, 2003

August 22, 2003

February 24, 2003

February 2, 2003

Land:

361,250,000 won

375,700,000 won

396,815,00 won

Buildings

431,899,200 won

407,533,00 won

391,817,160 won

491,017,039 won

그런데 이 사건 부동산 중 토지 부분에 관한 감정결과 중 ◇◇감정평가법인과 ✡✡감정평가법인의 감정가격은 그 가격시점을 망인의 사망일로부터 약 6개월이 경과한 2003. 8. 22.을 기준으로 하였을 뿐만 아니라 그 감정평가서에 의하면 평가를 함에 있어 인근 유사표준지의 공시지가를 기준으로 지가변동의 추이, 이 사건 토지의 위치, 형상, 환경, 이용상황 등의 제 요인과 인근지 지가수준 등을 참작하여 평가하였다고만 기재되어 있을 뿐 인근 유사표준지가 어떤 토지이며 구체적인 개별요인이 비교에 관한 아무런 기재가 없으며 감정평가의 목적도 이 사건 과세처분에 대한 심판청구를 청구할 목적으로 원고들이 의뢰하여 이루어진 점 등에 비추어 보면 위 감정평가에 의한 감정가격을 이 사건 토지에 대한 적정한 교환가치를 반영한 시가라고 할 수는 없다. 한편, 이 법원의 촉탁에 의한 ◇◇감정평가법인의 감정가격은 현실 이용상황에 대한 현장조사를 거쳐 이 사건 토지의 인근지역에 소재하고 이 사건 토지와 용도지역, 지목, 이용상황, 개별 특성 등이유사한 토지를 그 비교표준지로 선정하고, 지가변동률을 적용하여 시점수정치를 결정한 수 개별용인에 대한 비교를 함에 있어 참작이유를 알아볼 수 있을 정도로 구체적으로 명시하여 보정수치를 산출한 다음 그에 따라 이 사건 토지의 가액을 산출함으로써 토지의 객관적 가치를 적절히 반영하였다고 평가되므로 이를 채택하기로 한다. 나아가 이 사건 부동산 중 건물부분에 대하여 보건대. 이 법원의 촉탁에 의한 건축사 정○○의 감정평가결과를 제외한 나머지 감정평가결과는 건물가격을 평가함에 있어 평가가격 산출의 구체적인 자료 및 근거를 제시하지 아니한 채 건물의 구조, 용재, 시공 정도, 내부설비, 제 현상 및 관리상태 등을 참작하여 일괄하여 가격을 평가하였음에 반하여 건축사 정○○의 감정평가결과는 현황조사 및 제 자료를 조사하여 건물 신축에 소요된 자재 및 유사자재의 수량을 파악한 결과를 토대로 공사원가를 계산한 후 공사의 공종을 골조공사, 돌 및 미장 타일 마감 공사, 수장 및 목공사, 전기 위생공사, 부대공사 등으로 세분하여 각 공종별 내용연수에 따른 감가를 적용하여 공종별 원가를 계산하는 방법으로 건물가격을 평가하였는바, 이러한 사정에 비추어 보면 이 사건 부동산 중 건물 부분에 대한 건축사 정○○의 감정가격은 다른 감정평가법인의 감정가격에 비하여 보다 구체적이고 객관적인 자료에 근거한 것으로서 건물의 객관적 가치를 적절히 반영하였다고 평가되므로 이를 채택하기로 한다.

(4) If so, 396,815,00 won as appraisal price for the portion of the land of △△△ appraisal corporation entrusted by this court among the real estate in this case and 491,017,039 won as appraisal price for the portion of the building of ○○○○○, and 887,832,039 won as the market price of the real estate in this case. Thus, the value of the inherited property originally omitted by the plaintiffs is 267,752,143 won (237,832,039 won as the omitted return price for the real estate in this case + total of 29,920,104 won as the omitted return price for deposit interest + when calculating the fair amount of the inheritance tax for the year 203 portion of 203 portion of the inherited property, as shown in the attached Table, the portion exceeding 505,474,970 won as to the inherited property in this case should not be revoked. Therefore, the portion exceeding the legitimate amount of the inheritance tax in this case should be revoked.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiffs' claims of this case are accepted within the scope of the above recognition, and the remaining claims are dismissed as they are without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

List of Real Estate

1. ○○○○○○-dong 252-17 square meters and 289 square meters;

2. ○○○○○-dong 252-36 square meters on a road;

3. Four floors of 4 floors of ○○○○-gu ○○○-dong 252-17 Ground reinforced concrete structure sloping roof;

1st floor store and parking lot 240.10 square meters;

Among the two-story stores, 76.15 square meters;

247.715 square meters in a 2nd floor office.

247.715 square meters for three-storys;

247.715 square meters in a 4-story room

A multi-story and a parking lot of 24.715 square meters underground;

247.715 square meters on the ground of the second-story parking lot.

Table of Decision on Inheritance Tax, 203

(unit: source)

Classification

Decisions

Taxable Value of Inheritance

2,439,877,155

Mutual aid difficulties

700,000,000

Tax Base

1,739,877,155

Tax Rate

40%

calculated tax amount system;

535,950,862

Tax Credit for Reported Tax Amount

42,883,400

Amount of final tax

493,067,462

Additional Tax for Insincere Report

1,695,824

Additional Tax for Insincere Payment

10,711,685

Total determined tax amount

505,474,970

Voluntary Tax Amount

385,950,604

Related Acts and subordinate statutes

Article 60 of Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act (Principles, etc. of Appraisal)

(1) The value of property on which an inheritance tax or gift tax is levied under this Act shall be the market price as of the date the inheritance commences or the date of donation (hereinafter referred to as the "date of appraisal"). In such cases, the value appraised by the method of appraisal stipulated in Article 63 (1) 1 (a) and (b) (excluding cases falling under the provisions of Article 63 (2))

(2) The market price referred to in paragraph (1) shall be the value which is generally accepted in cases of free evaluation between many and unspecified persons, and shall include the acceptance and public sale price, appraisal price, and other things recognized as the market price as prescribed by

(3) In applying paragraph (1), where it is difficult to compute the market price, the price assessed by the methods prescribed in Articles 61 through 65 shall be based on the types, scale, transaction conditions, etc. of the relevant property.

Article 61 of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act (Appraisal of Real Estate, etc.)

(1) Real estate shall be appraised by the following methods:

2. Buildings:

The value calculated and publicly announced by the Commissioner of the National Tax Service at least once every page in consideration of the new construction price, structure, use, location, year of new construction, etc. of a building (excluding buildings falling under the provisions of subparagraphs 3 and 4);

○ Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 18177, Dec. 30, 2003)

(1) For the purpose of Article 60 (2) of the Act, the term "those recognized as the market price as prescribed by Presidential Decree, such as the expropriation or public sale price, the appraised price, etc." means, in cases of sale, appraisal, expropriation or public auction (referring to an auction under the Civil Procedure Act; hereafter the same shall apply in this paragraph) or public auction within six months (three months in the case of donated property) before or after the standard date of appraisal, it means the amount verified pursuant

1. If the fact of sale and purchase of the relevant property exists, the transaction value: Provided, That this shall not apply where the transaction value is deemed objectively unfair, such as transactions with persons with a special relationship provided for in Article 26 (4);