Seoul High Court 2008Na10435 (209.04.02)

The amount of voluntary payment tax shall not be deemed to constitute an erroneous payment.

The total amount of tax to be paid on a tax notice shall be indicated by the co-inheritors as the collection notice amount, so the Plaintiff’s tax amount may be deducted from the total determined tax amount as the already paid tax amount, and in this case, the amount of the voluntarily paid tax amount does not constitute the erroneous

209Da30311 Return of unjust enrichment

Kim XX and four others

Korea

Seoul High Court Decision 2008Na10435 Decided April 2, 2009

May 10, 2012

All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).

1. As to the grounds of appeal Nos. 1 and 2

Since the joint and several liability for inheritance tax of co-inheritors is not established by the requirement that the other co-inheritors not pay the inheritance tax to be paid by each co-inheritors, it is reasonable to deem that each co-inheritors has the effect of specifically determining their respective liability for tax payment by classifying and specifying the amount of tax to be paid individually by each co-inheritors, but the notice of collection having the effect of claiming the performance of the tax obligation to each co-inheritors may be given on the whole inheritance tax for which the joint and several liability for tax payment exists. In addition, in cases where the tax authority entered the total amount of tax to be paid by each co-inheritors in the disposition of imposing inheritance tax and the grounds for calculation thereof in the disposition of imposing inheritance tax on the co-inheritors, and issued each co-inheritors to each co-inheritors along with the notice of tax payment, the total amount of tax to be paid by each co-inheritors is indicated as the collection notice amount of tax to be paid jointly and severally by each co-inheritors, and the amount of tax to be paid by each co-inheritors is individually indicated in the specification of tax amount to be paid by each co-inheritors.

The court below accepted the judgment of the court of first instance and considered the adopted evidence, and acknowledged the facts pertaining to the total determined amount of inheritance tax from the first disposition to the sixth disposition, and the notice of tax payment including the amount of inheritance tax and the due date for each heir, etc., as stated in its reasoning, and rejected the Plaintiffs’ assertion that the amount of additional dues and increased additional dues should not be added on the portion exceeding 00 won among the total amount of the total amount of the inheritance tax determined by the court of first instance on the grounds that the tax liability of the deceased KimA’s property heir (hereinafter “he co-inheritors of this case”) was finalized through a series of disposition of inheritance tax and the revocation lawsuit thereon, and that the amount of tax liability should be added to the total amount of the inheritance tax determined by the inheritance tax, and the additional dues and increased additional dues should not be added on the portion exceeding 00 won.

Examining the above legal principles, relevant regulations, and the evidence related to the disposition of this case, in light of the records, such determination by the court below is just, and there is no error of incomplete deliberation or misapprehension of legal principles as to whether the tax payment is dismissed.

2. Regarding ground of appeal No. 3

Where a taxpayer of inheritance tax pays an inheritance tax, but the tax authority decides to correct the contents that increase the amount of inheritance tax, it may collect the remainder after deducting the amount of voluntary payment from the total determined tax amount after deducting the amount of tax already paid. In this case, the tax amount of voluntary payment does not fall under the erroneous payment, and the legal principles on the refund of national taxes and the refund of national taxes under the Framework Act on National Taxes cannot be applied. Therefore, the interest equivalent to the additional payment on the amount of voluntary payment cannot be deducted from the total amount of inheritance tax (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 97Nu1278, Jul. 10, 1998; 97Nu17674, Sept. 21, 199).

As seen in the preceding paragraph, the lower court determined that, inasmuch as the pertinent amount of inheritance tax on co-inheritors of this case was determined to be KRW 000, the refund and additional dues should be paid for the portion exceeding the already paid amount, but even if the amount was paid within the scope of the fixed amount of inheritance tax, it does not constitute unjust enrichment to the State, and it cannot be deducted as the already paid amount in addition to the additional dues as alleged by the Plaintiffs.

Examining the reasoning of the judgment below in light of the above legal principles, the judgment of the court below is just, and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the calculation of additional dues.

3. Therefore, all appeals are 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 on the bench.