Inheritance tax equivalent to the value of cultural heritage in the amount of inheritance tax.

The summary of deferment of collection of the amount calculated by multiplying the calculated tax amount based on the total value of inherited property including the value of cultural property by the ratio of the value of cultural property;

The contents of the decision shall be the same as attached.

1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed. 2. Costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Details of the instant disposition

다음 사실은 당사자 사이에 다툼이 없거나 갑 제1・2호증, 갑제5호증의 1, 2, 을 제1호증의 1〜11의 각 기재에 의하면 인정된다.

가. 원고들은 1995. 2. 21. 사망한 소외 김ㅇㅇ의 재산상속인들이다. 그런데 위 김ㅇㅇ의 상속재산 중 ㅇㅇ시 ㅇㅇ구 ㅇㅇ동 ㅇㅇ번지 소재 한옥은 ㅇㅇ시 민속자료 제28호로 지정된 주택으로서 문화재보호법에 따른 지정문화재(이하 문화재)다.

B. Accordingly, on April 16, 1996, the Defendant calculated the inheritance tax amount to be paid by the Plaintiffs according to the method of collecting the amount calculated by multiplying the calculated tax amount calculated based on the total value of the inherited property including the value of the cultural property by the ratio of the value of the cultural property to the total value of the inherited property (hereinafter the Defendant’s method of calculating the inheritance tax amount to be paid by the Plaintiffs as inheritance tax.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. Provisions of relevant Acts and subordinate statutes

According to Article 8-3 (1) 2 of the former Inheritance Tax Act, where cultural heritage of an ancestor is included in the inherited property, the collection of the amount of inheritance tax equivalent to the value of the cultural property is deferred.

B. Summary of the parties' arguments

The defendant asserts that the disposition of this case is lawful on the grounds of the above disposition grounds and the provisions of the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes. Accordingly, the plaintiff asserts that the inheritance tax amount equivalent to the value of cultural properties is unlawful, despite that the amount calculated by subtracting the calculated tax amount calculated by including the value of cultural properties from the calculated tax amount calculated by including the value of cultural properties (hereinafter the plaintiff's calculation method).

3. Determination

The difference between the deferred collection amount calculated by the Defendant’s calculation method and the amount calculated by the Plaintiff’s calculation method is due to the difference in the deferred tax rate. In cases where the deferred tax rate is applied, the calculation of the tax amount equivalent to those not included in the tax base (e.g., non-taxable, non-taxable, non-taxable, or deductible) should be based on the Plaintiff’s calculation method, barring special provisions, but the calculation of the tax amount equivalent to those included in the tax base should be based on the Defendant’s calculation method, barring special provisions. Article 8-3 of the former Inheritance Tax Act, which is a provision on the deferment of inheritance tax on cultural property, is in the front of Article 12, which is a provision on the tax base, and Article 8-3 of the former Inheritance Tax Act, is a special provision on non-taxation, non-taxable, non-taxable, or various mutual-aid provisions on non-taxable, non-taxable, or non-taxable, does not include the value of cultural property in the tax base (Article 12 subparag. 2 of the current Inheritance Tax Act). 74(1).

Therefore, it is reasonable to view that the amount of inheritance tax equivalent to the value of the cultural property, the collection of which is deferred pursuant to Article 8-3 (1) 2 of the former Inheritance Tax Act, is the amount calculated according to the defendant's calculation method, namely, the amount calculated based on the total value of the cultural property, multiplied by the ratio of the value of the cultural

4. Conclusion

Therefore, since the disposition of this case is legitimate, the plaintiff's claim seeking its revocation is dismissed as it is without merit, and the costs of lawsuit are assessed against the losing plaintiff. It is so decided as per Disposition.