Whether the legal fiction provision of Article 32-2 of the former Inheritance Tax Act (amended by Act No. 3474 of Dec. 31, 1981) applies to a simple title trust

The legal fiction of donation under Article 32-2 of the former Inheritance Tax Act (amended by Act No. 3474 of Dec. 31, 1981) is the trust property under the provisions of Article 3 of the Trust Act, in case where the trust property is not registered or recorded in the register of stockholders or the register of bonds, or where the trust property is not recorded in the register of stockholders or the register of bonds, it shall be deemed that the trust property is donated to the trustee. Thus, a simple title trust shall not be deemed a trust under the Trust Act. Thus, even if the fact of title trust is not registered or registered pursuant to the provisions of Article 3 of the Trust Act, it shall not be deemed a donation

Article 32-2 of the former Inheritance Tax Act (amended by Act No. 3474 of Dec. 31, 1981); Articles 1(2) and 3 of the Trust Act

Supreme Court Decision 78Nu396 delivered on January 16, 1979, 83Nu192 Delivered on July 26, 1983

[Judgment of the court below]

The director of the tax office.

Seoul High Court Decision 84Gu629 delivered on August 20, 1985

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

Upon examining the judgment below in light of the records, the court below is justified in finding that the non-party, who was the representative director of the Nam-Pacific Leisure Complex Co., Ltd. and the reputation tourism of the non-party corporation, had held the title trust by borrowing the plaintiff's name as to the shares at the time of the original adjudication from March 20, 1979 to December 20, 1979 as a means of share distribution to conceal the property at the time of issuing the capital increase shares of the above company, and registering the owner as the plaintiff in the register of shareholders of the above company as the plaintiff, and there is no error of misconception of facts or misapprehension of legal principles due to violation of the rules of evidence, such as the theory

In addition, the legal fiction of donation under Article 32-2 of the former Inheritance Tax Act (amended by Act No. 3474 of Dec. 31, 1981) means that a trust property is a trust property under Article 3 of the Trust Act, or where a trust property is not registered or recorded in the register of shareholders or the register of bonds, or where a trust property is not entered in the register of shareholders or the register of bonds, it shall be deemed that a trust property is donated to the trustee. Thus, a mere title trust shall not be deemed a trust under the Trust Act, even if a trust of title is not registered or registered pursuant to Article 3 of the Trust Act, it shall not be deemed a donation pursuant to the provisions of the former Inheritance Tax Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 78Nu396, Jul. 26, 1983).

In the same purport, the decision of the court below that the tax disposition of this case, which was deemed as a donation under the provisions of Article 32-2 of the former Inheritance Tax Act, was unlawful on the premise that the defendant created a trust for the property with a simple title trust, such as the above recognition, is just and there is no error of law such as the theory of

We cannot accept the judgment of the court below because it is erroneous for evidence preparation and fact-finding, which belong to the exclusive authority of the court below, or attack the judgment of the court below in its independent opinion on trust under the Trust Act

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Choi Jae-ho (Presiding Justice)