logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2016.12.06 2016누54734
증여세부과처분취소
Text

1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. The reasons for the court’s explanation of this case are as follows: “Nos. 4, 10 to 14 of the judgment of the court of first instance”; “Nos. 2, 5, 3, and 7 of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be deleted” (the plaintiffs, on the date of pleading of the second instance trial, withdrawn all their arguments on stock transaction from 2007 to 2009 on the date of pleading of the second instance trial.

Part 7, Chapter 4, "C," "C," and the following judgments are as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance except for addition of the following judgments, thereby citing them as they are in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The addition;

A. The plaintiffs asserted that the provision on constructive donation of title trust property under Article 45-2 (1) of the former Inheritance and Gift Tax Act applies only to the case where a transfer of title is made on the register of shareholders, and in the case where the register of shareholders is not made pursuant to Article 45-2 (3) of the same Act, whether a transfer of title is made on the register of shareholders pursuant to the statement of changes in stocks, etc. submitted to the head of the competent tax office. At the time of March 4, 2010, the register of shareholders of the company of this case stated that the company of this case holds 8,800 shares out of total 22,00 shares of the company of this case, and 13,200 shares of the company of this case were held by the plaintiff C, and the transfer of title is not made on the register of shareholders from G and B, so that the transfer of title to the shares

B. In light of the following circumstances, each of the evidence Nos. 1, 5-1, 2, 6-1, 1, 2, and 3, it is difficult to believe that each of the evidence Nos. 9, 10, and 12 was recorded in the evidence Nos. 11 and 13, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

The plaintiffs' assertion is without merit.

1. The register of shareholders shall contain matters concerning shareholders and stock certificates.

arrow