Seoul Administrative Court-2016-Gu Partnership-6487 ( August 17, 2017)

Seocho 2015west 1160 ( March 2, 2016)

No unlawful act concerning global income tax on stock dividend shall be recognized to a person who succeeds to the shares held in title due to the death of a truster.

The dividend and global income tax return made under the name of the title trustee after the death of the title truster is merely an incidental act to the stock title trust, and cannot be deemed as an unlawful act. This is no different even if the title truster knew the title trust and did not report as an inherited property.

Article 26-2 (1) and (2) of the Framework Act on National Taxes, Article 27 (2) of the Enforcement Decree of the Framework Act on National

2017Nu7092 Revocation of Disposition of Imposition of Gift Tax, etc.

LAA

O Head of tax office

March 27, 2018

April 10, 2018

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Cheong-gu Office

The imposition of each global income tax (including additional tax) on November 3, 2014 by the Defendant against the Plaintiff on November 3, 2014 shall be revoked.

1. Purport of claim

The imposition disposition of each global income tax (including additional tax) on the Plaintiff on November 3, 2014 in the attached Form 1 of the first instance judgment rendered by the Defendant on the Plaintiff on November 3, 2014

2. Purport of appeal

The part against the defendant in the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked, and the plaintiff's claim corresponding to the revocation shall be dismissed.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasoning for the judgment in this case is as follows: “The Defendant did not report the title trust of the deceased at the time of the commencement of inheritance with the knowledge of the title trust of the deceased, and did not transfer for a long time the Plaintiff received dividends under the name of the title trustee and received global income tax return constitutes an active concealment. However, in light of the legal principles as seen earlier, the Defendant’s sufficient evidence was not found to prove that the title trust of the deceased and the Plaintiff’s key issues and subsequent incidental acts were illegal acts conducted consistently with the purpose of tax evasion. The Supreme Court Decision 2014Du6838 Decided August 24, 2017 cited by the Defendant was the same as the reasoning for the judgment in the first instance, except for adding “the Supreme Court Decision 2014Du6838 Decided August 24, 2017, which is inappropriate to invoke the matter different from the instant case.” Thus, this is cited pursuant to Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure

2. Conclusion

Therefore, the judgment of the first instance court is just, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit.