Whether the donation of an excess of the statutory share of inheritance by division under consultation has been made;

According to Article 1013 of the Civil Act that provides for the division of inherited property through consultation, and Article 1015 of the Civil Act that provides for the retroactive effect of division, even if one of the co-inheritors acquires the property exceeding his own share of inherited property, it shall be deemed as having been succeeded from the inheritee at the time of the commencement of the inheritance, and it shall not be deemed as having been donated from the other co-inheritors.

Articles 1013, 1015, 29-2 of the Inheritance Tax Act

[Judgment of the court below]

Head of Yongsan Tax Office

Seoul High Court Decision 86Gu615 delivered on December 30, 1986

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

We examine the grounds of appeal by Defendant Litigation Performers.

According to Article 1013 of the Civil Act, co-inheritors may divide inherited property at any time by agreement, except where the inheritee has determined the method of division of inherited property by will or prohibited division. Article 1015 of the same Act provides that the division of inherited property is retroactively effective at the time of the commencement of the inheritance. As such, even if one of the co-inheritors acquired property exceeding the inherent share of inherited property by mutual agreement on inherited property, it shall be deemed as having been succeeded by the inheritee at the time of the commencement of the inheritance, and it shall not be deemed as having been donated by other co-inheritors.

In light of the records, the court below held that the defendant's taxation disposition of this case was unlawful on the ground that the plaintiff received the inherited property exceeding the unique share of inherited property from other co-inheritors in accordance with the division of consultation on inherited property between co-inheritors including the plaintiff and the plaintiff, and there is no error of law as to the theory of lawsuit.

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 Park Jong-dong (Presiding Justice)