Seoul Administrative Court 2013Guhap61753 ( October 25, 2014)

Seocho 2013west 2741 (Law No. 138.05)

A beneficial shareholder who has paid subscription money for new shares issued by the company of this case is a representative director who uses the name of the plaintiff.

The representative director of the instant company was convicted of forging the Plaintiff’s subscription form for new shares under the Plaintiff’s name without the Plaintiff’s consent on the grounds that he forged the Plaintiff’s subscription form, and the certificate of subscription for new shares and the contract for subscription for new shares issued under the Plaintiff’s name was confirmed to have been borrowed by the representative director of the instant company from 00, and thus

Article 39 of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act: Donation of Benefits from Capital Increase

Seoul High Court 2014Nu51564

○ ○

○ Head of tax office

Seoul Administrative Court 2013Guhap61753

oly 16, 2014

october 30, 2014

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

1. Purport of claim

the Defendant received donations from the Plaintiff on October 0, 000, from the Plaintiff on October 0, 000, to the Plaintiff.

Each imposition of gift tax of KRW 000,000,000, KRW 000,000, and KRW 000,000, and KRW 00,00,00,00, as to the portion of gift received from ○○○, shall be revoked.

2. Purport of appeal

The judgment of the first instance is revoked. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasoning of this court's judgment is as follows. Thus, it is accepted by Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Parts used for cutting.

○ From the fourth bottom to the fifth place, the part "from the second to the second place" shall be as follows:

4) In order to increase the capital of this case, ○○ is one billion won to the representative director ○○○, a representative director of YAC.

A request to lend the shares of this case under the name of the Plaintiff on October 0, 000.

인수대금 2억 5천만 원, 이○○ 명의로 3억 5천만 원, 0000. 0. 0. □□이앤씨㈜ 명의로 4억 원 합계 10억 원을 ■■이앤씨의 계좌에 입금하였다.

This Ordinance of the Ministry of Finance and Economy shall set up a plan for the settlement of △&C in total of KRW 1 billion on October 0, 000 and KRW 500 million on October 0, 000 and KRW 1 billion on October 500.

The above borrowed money was deposited into his account and repaid.

○ 제5쪽 제6행의 "0000. 0. 0,"을 "0000. 0. 0.,"로, 제7행의 "■■이앤씨"를 "■■이앤씨"로 각 고치고, 제8행의 "[인정근거]"란에 "갑 제12호증, 갑 제13호증의 1 내지 3, 갑 제14호증의 각 기재"를 추가한다.

○ 6-1 to 5-1 (A) parts of the “(6)” are as follows.

가) 송○○은 이○○과 10억 원에 관한 금전소비대차계약을 체결한 후 0000. 0.0. 원고 명의로 이 사건 주식의 인수대금 2억 5천만 원, 이○○ 명의로 3억 5천만 원, 0000. 0. 0. □□이앤씨㈜ 명의로 6억 원 합계 10억 원을 ■■이앤씨의 계좌에 입금하였다. 반면 송○○과 원고 사이에는 어떠한 금전소비대차계약도 체결되지 않았다. 한편 위 차용금은 이○○이 0000. 0. 0. 및 0000. 0. 0. 모두 변제하였다. 따라서 이 사건 주식의 인수대금 2억 5천만 원을 실질적으로 납입한 자는 이○○이라고 할 수 있다.

2. Conclusion

Since the judgment of the first instance is justifiable, the defendant's appeal is dismissed as it is groundless.