logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2018.06.28 2017구합57530
증여세부과처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On April 12, 2013, the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant company”) transferred 4,00 shares of a limited liability company C (hereinafter “instant company”) to the Plaintiff (40% of the total number of issued shares; hereinafter “instant shares”) and reported on May 10, 2013 that the Plaintiff transferred the instant shares to the Defendant at KRW 10,000 per share.

B. After investigating the transfer income tax on B on July 2015, the Defendant confirmed that B transferred the instant shares to the Plaintiff who is a specially related party, and assessed the Plaintiff as donated the instant shares from B on October 16, 2015, and assessed the market price per share of the instant shares to the Plaintiff on October 16, 2015 pursuant to Article 63(1)1 (c) of the former Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act (amended by Act No. 11845, May 28, 2013; hereinafter “Gift”) and Article 54(1) and (2) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act (amended by Act No. 12168, Jun. 28, 2013; hereinafter “Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act”) as KRW 222,360,00,000, additional tax, 86, 279, 380, 284, 978

(hereinafter “instant disposition”). C.

On April 14, 2016, the Plaintiff appealed to the Tax Tribunal on April 14, 2016, but was dismissed on December 21, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 4, Eul evidence 1 to 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is unlawful for the following reasons.

1) On March 31, 2009, D received 500 shares of the company of this case from E, and the supplementary evaluation method under the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act shall not be applied. 2) As the representative director of the company of this case and her husband G continued to exist, F and her husband G were made a divisional accounting by omitting liabilities, etc. for loans, etc.

arrow