Early High Court Decision 2013J 2974 (Law No. 146.30)

The propriety of the claim claim to the effect that the application of the wrongful calculation rule to the key stock transaction is improper.

In light of the fact that the claimant corporation, without special reasons, owns its own shares for a long time and transfers them to special persons concerned, and fails to present objective grounds for calculating the transaction value, it is difficult to accept the claim claim that the transaction value of the shares should be deemed the market price.

Article 52 of the Corporate Tax Act / Article 87 of the Enforcement Decree of the Corporate Tax Act

2014Guhap5621 Disposition of revocation of imposition of corporate tax, etc.

Co., Ltd. 000

port of origin

2015.04.16

2015.05.07

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Cheong-gu Office

The Defendant imposed corporate tax of KRW 183,975,580 for the Plaintiff on April 10, 2013.

The income amount of 634,348,000 won, which was derived from redB by the income earner in 2010.

Each notification shall be revoked.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On January 1, 1997, the Plaintiff is a company with capital of 50 million won, total issued stocks of 10,000 won, which is established for the purpose of conducting wholesale and trade business of electronic equipment. The Plaintiff is a major shareholder of HongA as the Plaintiff’s representative director.

B. On October 17, 2010, the Plaintiff transferred 800 shares of its own stocks that the Plaintiff acquired from around 2002 to HongB, a child of HongB, to KRW 15,000 per share and KRW 12,000 per share (hereinafter “instant shares”).

C. The Defendant deemed that the Plaintiff transferred the instant shares at a low price to HongB, a person with a special relationship, according to the instant transaction, and thus, the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act (hereinafter “Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act”) as shown in

The market value of the shares of this case assessed according to the supplementary evaluation method stipulated in the supplementary evaluation method (=6,348,00 won per share 807,935 won x 800 won per share) and KRW 634,348,000,000 (=646,348,000 won - 12 million) in the calculation of earnings (=646,348,000 won - 12 million) and notified the Plaintiff of the change in the amount of income on April 10, 2014, while the Plaintiff notified the Plaintiff of the change in the amount of income by disposing of the difference as a bonus against RedB (hereinafter collectively referred to as the "disposition in this case").

D. The plaintiff appealed and filed a request for a trial with the Tax Tribunal, but the Tax Tribunal has made the request.

On June 30, 2014, it was dismissed.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including branch numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

In applying the provision regarding calculation of unfair acts, if there is a price generally traded between a third party who is not a person with a special relationship in a similar situation to the transaction in question, the price shall be determined and the supplementary method under the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act shall apply only to the case where the market price is unstable, and even though there is a case where the plaintiff's shares were traded between a third party who is not a person with a special relationship in the six months before and after the transaction in this case, the disposition in this case is unlawful by calculating the price of the shares

B. Relevant statutes

The entries in the attached Table-related statutes are as follows.

C. Determination

In the case of unlisted stocks with low market value, where there is a transaction fact involving such stocks, the value of the stocks shall be evaluated by considering the transaction value as the market value and the value of the stocks shall not be assessed by supplementary assessment methods stipulated in the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act (Supreme Court Decision 2000Du1287 delivered on July 28, 200);

Supreme Court Decision 2003Du447 Delivered on November 26, 2004, etc.) In this case, the term "market price" is general and general.

Inasmuch as the objective exchange price formed through a normal transaction refers to the transaction example price, in order to be recognized as the market price, the circumstances should be recognized that the relevant transaction is made in a general and normal manner and properly reflects the objective exchange value at the time of donation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Du26988, Apr. 26, 2012).

According to the evidence evidence Nos. 4 through 6, thisCC’s 200 won per share out of the Plaintiff’s shares to HongB on September 16, 2010, and 5,000 won per share; 200 won per share; 5,000 won per share out of the Plaintiff’s shares; 200 won per share out of 20 billion won per share; 200 won per share out of 20 billion won per share was transferred to KimA on April 4, 201 to employees of 5,00 won per share; 30 billion won per share out of 20 billion won per share; 4,000 won per share out of 20,000 won per share; 4,000 won per share shares were transferred to employees of 20,000 won per share and more than 20,000 won per share; 1,000 won per share shares were transferred to employees of 20,000 won per share.

Therefore, the disposition of this case, which calculated the market price of the stocks of this case according to the supplementary evaluation method under the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act, cannot be deemed unlawful on the ground that the defendant's market price of the stocks of this case is unclear

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.