In the case of unlisted stocks, the burden of proving that there is no supplementary evaluation method under Article 5 (2) through (5) of the Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax Act.

The burden of proving that there was no supplementary evaluation method under Article 9(1) of the Inheritance Tax Act and Article 5(2) through (5) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act because it is difficult to calculate the market price at the time of donation because it is not always difficult to calculate the market price of the non-listed stocks.

Article 9(1) of the Inheritance Tax Act, the latter part of Article 5(1) and Article 5(5)1 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act

[Judgment of the court below]

Daejeon director of the tax office

Seoul High Court Decision 86Gu117 delivered on June 7, 1988

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

1. We examine the first ground for appeal by the defendant litigation performer.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below did not have any evidence to acknowledge that all the shares of this case which the plaintiff accepted in excess of the preemptive right were allocated out of the non-party's waived shares of the non-party having a special relationship with the plaintiff, and calculated the number of shares of the plaintiff by the formula prescribed in the General Rules of Inheritance Tax, 109. 34-4.

The argument points out that since the shareholders of the company of the company of the company of the company of the company of the company of the company of the company of the company of the company of the company of the company of the company of the company of the company of the company of the company of the company of the company of the company of the company of the company of the company of the company of the company

2. We examine the second ground for appeal.

The burden of proving that there was no supplementary evaluation method under Article 9(1) of the Inheritance Tax Act and Article 5(2) through (5) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act because it is difficult to calculate the market price at the time of donation because it is not always difficult to calculate the market price of the non-listed stocks.

According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, there is no evidence to support that there was no supplementary evaluation method due to the impossibility of calculating the market price at the time of deemed donation of stocks of the non-party Grand Construction Co., Ltd., and there is no evidence to support that there was a sale and purchase example of the above company's stocks according to the evidence of the court below, and there is room to deem that the sale and sale example value reflects the objective edification value at the time of deemed donation, and that there is a reasonable price at the time of donation, and the defendant's disposition of this case was revoked

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

Justices Kim Sang-won (Presiding Justice) Lee Jong-won (Presiding Justice)