Seoul Administrative Court-2013-Gu Partnership-5401 ( November 14, 2013)

The propriety of the disposition of evaluating overseas unlisted stocks as a supplementary evaluation method

In calculating the value per share of an overseas subsidiary, it is difficult to see that applying the supplementary evaluation method under Article 54 of the Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act as it is is "when it is not proper", and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Article 60 of the Inheritance and Gift Tax Act

Seoul High Court-2013-Nu-52522 (Law No. 19, 2014)

Maximum00 2

O Head of the tax office 1

Seoul Administrative Court-2013-Gu Partnership-5401 ( November 14, 2013)

2, 2014.08

2014.19

1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs and the defendant 00 chief of the tax office are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by each party.

1. Purport of claim

A. The imposition of each global income tax on the part that exceeds the amount indicated in the column of the "political tax amount" in the separate sheet 1.Attachment 1, attached Table 1, attached hereto against the plaintiff 100 as to the plaintiff 1*. The imposition of each global income tax on the part that exceeds the amount indicated in the "political tax amount" in the separate sheet 1.2, attached Table 1, attached Table 1, attached hereto against the plaintiff 100 **. The imposition of each global income tax on the plaintiff 1.2 *. The imposition of each global income tax on the part that exceeds the amount listed in the "political tax amount" column as stated in the separate sheet 1.2, attached Table 1, attached Table 2, attached hereto against the plaintiff 10 * the imposition of each global income tax on the plaintiff 1.0 *

B. Attached Table 1. Attached hereto 1.4, which was rendered by the director of the tax office on January 16, 2012 against the Plaintiff U.S. 00

The imposition of each gift tax stated in the "amount of excess disposal" shall be revoked.

2. Purport of appeal

A. The plaintiffs: The part against the plaintiffs in the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked. The claim No. 1-A(a) shall be claimed.

as the same shall apply.

B. Defendant 00 director of the tax office: cancellation of the part against the director of the tax office of 00 among the judgment of the first instance, and the plaintiff 00's claim corresponding to the above cancellation is dismissed.

1. Quotation of the reasons for the judgment of the first instance;

The reasons for this judgment shall be with the exception of dismissal or addition of the following:

Therefore, Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act, the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act is the same as the grounds for the judgment of the first instance.

this shall be quoted.

(1) Chapter 6, Paragraph 2, the former Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act (amended by Act No. 9916, Jan. 1, 2010)

The term "the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act" (hereinafter referred to as "the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act") shall be amended on February 22, 2008 by the Enforcement Decree of the former Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act.

The term "the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act before it was amended by Ordinance No. 20621, hereinafter referred to as "the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act")."

(2) The number of pages 9, 11, "for a subsidiary" shall be "for a subsidiary".

(3) On the third side of the company, the term "subsidiary" shall be advanced into "for the assets of the subsidiary".

(4) Part IV "105,546,527 HK dollars" shall be deemed as "105,563,797 HK$".

(5) On face 11, YCH per share, which is a flive flive and overseas subsidiary.

The method of supplementary evaluation under Article 54 of the Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act is not appropriate.

The Director of the Tax Office of Hong Kong, the Director of the Tax Office of

Since the market interest rate is lower than Korea, the net profit and loss value is calculated on the basis of the domestic interest rate.

When calculating the value, the net profit and loss amount is reduced, and as a result, the value of the plaintiff's donated property is also reduced.

Although Defendant 00 Head of the tax office asserts that such assertion alone is a foreign subsidiary, YCH-1

In calculating the per share value, the supplementary evaluation method under Article 54 of the Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act is applied as it is.

It is difficult to see that it is "when it is not reasonable," and other evidence to acknowledge it.

b)that is no longer known;

6. On Chapter 11, "An unlawful method" is added to "(as a supplementary method, it seems that the defendant calculated the amount of income in each business year in 2002, 203, and 2004 in each business year in 665,350K, 6,903, 257HK, 26,830, and 173 HK as a result of the application of supplementary method of assessment, as there is no presentation of the basis for the calculation, it seems that the legitimacy of the result of the application of supplementary method of assessment is not secured)."

2. Conclusion

Therefore, the appeal by the plaintiffs and the defendant 00 chief of the tax office is dismissed as it is without merit.

D. It is so decided as per Disposition.