The burden of proving that the method of calculating the market price of unlisted stocks and the supplementary property evaluation method pursuant to Article 5 of the Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax Act are inevitable;

In the case of unlisted shares in the appraisal of the value of transferred property, if there is an example of sale that properly reflects the objective exchange value, the price shall be deemed the market value, and only when there is no such example or it is difficult to compute the market price by any other method, the burden of proving that there is a supplementary assessment method under Article 5 of the Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax Act and it is inevitable to select such supplementary assessment method.

Article 5 of the Enforcement Decree of Inheritance Tax Act

Supreme Court Decision 84Nu322 delivered on November 27, 1984, 86Nu263 delivered on September 23, 1986, Supreme Court Decision 86Nu584 delivered on December 9, 1986

Plaintiff

Head of Yongsan Tax Office

Seoul High Court Decision 86Gu960 delivered on April 2, 1987

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The grounds of appeal by the defendant litigant are examined.

According to the decision of the court below, the defendant acquired 2,496 shares of the company from the non-party 1 on January 25, 1983 (500 won per share) with 1,300 won per share, and the above transfer price constitutes a case where the above shares were transferred for significantly low price among the related parties provided for in Article 34-2 (1) of the Inheritance Tax Act, and the difference between the price and the market price is deemed as gift and it is difficult to calculate the market price under Article 5 (5) of the Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax Act. On the other hand, the court below rejected the plaintiff's request that the transfer price of shares was transferred to the non-party 1 and the transfer price of the above shares was 1,496 shares as stated in the judgment of the court below, and it is difficult to establish the market price of the above shares at the time of the transfer price as stated in Article 5 (1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax Act as the market price at the time of the above transfer or sale.

In light of the records, the above fact-finding and decision of the court below is just and it cannot be justified in its process.

In addition, the court below stated that the theory of lawsuit is illegal that the court below recognized the transfer of the shares in this case as the transfer of security rather than the actual transfer of the shares in this case, or as seen above, it is clear that the court below rejected the plaintiff's assertion that the transfer of shares in this case is the meaning of the transfer of security simply

Therefore, the appeal is 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.

Justices Man-hee (Presiding Justice)