Determination as to whether there was a stock donation subject to gift tax under tax law

Whether there was a stock donation as a subject of gift tax under tax law shall be determined by the agreement of the doctor with respect to stock donation and the acquisition of shares, and whether the status as a de facto shareholder has been acquired.

2014Guhap104574 Revocation of Disposition of Imposition of Gift Tax

The ownership of shares under the first transaction shall, even if the ownership of shares is difference, be at least this share as the plaintiff.

Inasmuch as it is clear that there is no legitimate title to possess the instant shares, ○○ or ○○ in connection with the instant shares

It is reasonable to view that the transfer of property to the plaintiff does not exist.

B) Each statement made by ○○○, △△○, etc., relationship between the Plaintiff and △△△△, Plaintiff’s occupation, etc.

In light of the counter-defensive circumstances, the Plaintiff’s shares of this case through the second transaction of this case.

It is difficult to easily exclude the transferred fact from the perspective of differentness.

C) The Defendant: (a) the former Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act (amended by Act No. 111130, Dec. 31, 2011) (amended by Act No.

Pursuant to Article 2(3) of the former Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the "former Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act"), the act of donation column or transaction

tangible and intangible property that can calculate economic value regardless of its name, form, purpose, etc.

by direct or indirect means any transfer to another person without compensation or by contribution;

It means to increase the property value of the person, so the consent of the witness or whether the consent of the witness is obtained or not.

It argues that it does not conform to roads, but this is a concept of a private donation and a concept of a gift under tax law.

The primary interpretation is hindered, and the above argument is contrary to the purport of the Supreme Court precedents.

It is difficult to do so.

D) The Defendant did not intend to transfer the ownership of the instant shares to the Plaintiff, if the Defendant:

If only the title of ownership is transferred, the legal fiction of title trust under Article 45-2 of the former Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act.

The disposition of this case is legitimate, however, the above provision itself is the transfer of property.

under the premise that the property transfer of the stock of this case under the second transaction of this case is valid, and

As seen earlier, it is difficult to accept the Defendant’s above assertion.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

(c)

K.K.K.

It constitutes an impossible performance and thus, the second transaction in this case is null and void; and

Therefore, the instant disposition is unlawful due to such invalid act.

(b) Related statutes;

Attachment 'Related Acts and subordinate statutes' shall be as shown.

(c) Fact of recognition;

1) The plaintiff's invalidity of the second transaction of this case against ○○○ in the district court e branch office e branch office

A civil suit seeking a seal was filed (ff District Court e Branch 2015 Gohap40345), and the above court

A. On August 21, 2015, between the Plaintiff and ○○○ on the transfer of shares at the time of the second transaction in this case.

The judgment in favor of the plaintiff on the ground that the second transaction in this case was not in agreement with the plaintiff

The judgment was pronounced (hereinafter referred to as "related judgment") and the above judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

2) In the course of the investigation of aff regional tax office, ○○○ changed the name of ○○○○ in the name of the shares.

A request for a seal shall be made and shall be made, and shall be all reported and processed by Do governor Do Governor.

D. A statement was made to the effect that the shares in the name of the corporation at the time were to be known to the effect that the shares in the name of the corporation were to be known.

in the course of the investigation by Do governor Do governor Do governor Do governor Do governor Do governor Do governor Do governor Do governor

There is no other problem, and documents related to a corporation which has another person as a shareholder or executive officer.

It is not easy to prepare and change shares in the name of the young children because there is a lot of inconvenience to prepare.

며, 아들은 그 앞으로 ◎◎◎◎의 주식을 이전한 사실도 알지 못했고, 이번에 국세청에서 아들도 조사한다고 하기에 이를 처음 얘기하여 알게 되었다'는 취지로 진술하였으며, 이 법원의 증인으로 나와서도 그와 같은 취지로 진술하였다.

3) The Plaintiff graduated from Gg University’s medical college, and from March 2010, the Ky University’s medical college

EFFE and assistant professor, and the plaintiff also holds office in the process of investigating aff regional tax office

'나는 ◎◎◎◎의 주식이 내 명의로 되어 있는 것을 전혀 모르고 있었고, 최근에서야

He stated to the effect that he was aware of such fact from his father.

Facts that there is no dispute over recognition, Gap evidence Nos. 9, Eul evidence Nos. 3, 4, and 6, and Do Governor of the witness

Testimony, the purport of the whole pleadings

D. Judgment on the plaintiff's first argument

1) Whether there was a stock donation subject to gift tax under tax law or not is a stock donation

shall be entitled to exercise the rights of shareholders by acquiring the agreement and shares of the

It should be determined by whether it was obtained (Supreme Court Decision 2011Du14579 Decided January 26, 2012).

(see, e.g., Decision)

2) Based on the foregoing legal doctrine, comprehensively considering all the following circumstances acknowledged by the Health Team, the evidence and the purport of the entire pleadings as seen earlier, based on the foregoing legal doctrine:

D. The Plaintiff’s holding of the shares of this case was determined to be null and void by the judgment of the court below

As long as there has been no legitimate title, under the premise that the transfer of property pursuant to the second transaction of this case is effective.

It is also difficult to avoid the illegality of the disposition of this case.

Therefore, on such premise, the first time of the plaintiff's assertion is reasonable (e.g., the plaintiff's first time).

Sixth, insofar as the illegality of the disposition of this case is recognized, the remaining arguments of the plaintiff are different.

A road shall not be determined.

A) The donation is a core symbol of “transfer of property” as well as gratuitous performance, and the second series of years in this case.

I have confirmed that the decision is null and void due to the lack of conformity with the intention by the final and conclusive related court ruling.

C.C. Head of C.C. Tax Office

September 24, 2015

October 22, 2015

1. The Defendant’s imposition of gift tax of KRW 1,495,711,580 against the Plaintiff on January 2, 2014 shall be revoked.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by each person;

The same shall apply to the order of the Gu office.

1. Details of the disposition;

가. ○○○는 2009. 9. 15. 주식회사 ◎◎◎◎(이하 '◎◎◎◎'이라 한다)의 대표이사인 ●●●에게 ◎◎◎◎ 주식 24,600주(이하 '이 사건 주식'이라 한다)를 1주당 10,000원으로 하여 2억 4,600만 원에 양도하고(이하 '이 사건 1차 거래'라고 한다) 2009. 9.18. 이 사건 주식 양도에 따른 양도소득세와 증권거래세를 신고・납부하였으나, ◎◎◎◎은 위 1차 거래를 반영한 주식변동상황명세서를 관할세무서에 제출하지 않았다. 나. 이후 ○○○는 2011. 11. 29. 이 사건 주식을 원고에게 1주당 10,000원으로 하여 2억 4,600만 원에 양도하고(이하 '이 사건 2차 거래'라고 한다) 같은 날 양도소득세와 증권거래세를 신고・납부하였으며, ◎◎◎◎은 2012. 3. 21. 2011 사업연도 법인세 신고시 위 2차 거래를 반영하여 주식변동상황명세서를 제출하였다.다. ff지방국세청장은 ◎◎◎◎에 대한 주식변동상황조사를 실시하여 ○○○ 명의의 이 사건 주식이 사실은 ●●●가 ○○○ 앞으로 명의신탁한 것임을 확인하고, ○○○가 2011. 11. 29. ○○○로부터 이 사건 주식을 환원하는 과정에서 아들인 원고에게 이를 우회 증여한 것으로 보아 증여세 과세자료를 피고에게 통보하였으며, 이에 따라

On January 2, 2014, the Defendant decided and notified the Plaintiff of KRW 1,495,711,580 of the gift tax for the year 201 (hereinafter “instant disposition”). D. The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal on March 17, 2014, but was dismissed on September 12, 2014. The Plaintiff was dismissed on September 12, 2014. The Plaintiff did not have any dispute as to the grounds for recognition, each of the entries in subparagraphs 1 through 4, 1 through 4, 1, 2, and 1, 2, and 2 (including the spot numbers, if any; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the entire pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The instant disposition should be revoked because it is unlawful in the following respect.

1) It constitutes a false representation to unilaterally transfer the name of the instant shares to the Plaintiff against the Plaintiff’s will without the Plaintiff’s expression and involvement. The instant disposition is unlawful due to such invalid act.

2) The instant shares had already been transferred from ○○ at the time of the first transaction of this case on September 15, 2009 to ○○○ at the time of the first transaction of this case, and, however, ○○ through the second transaction of this case.