Seoul Administrative Court 2013Guhap54911 ( November 15, 2013)

It is illegal that the gift tax should be calculated and imposed on the non-specially related person's free loan pursuant to Article 41 (1) 1 of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act and Article 31-7 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act.

(1) With respect to the gratuitous use of funds by a non-specially related person, taxation by analogical application of Article 41-4(1)1 of the former Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act, which is premised on a gratuitous loan from a specially related person, is likely to undermine the taxpayer's trust interests and undermine the legal stability and predictability oriented by the no taxation without law by infringing the legislator's discretion. Thus, the Defendant's taxation disposition that analogically applies the said provision is unlawful.

Article 41-4 of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act / [Donation of Benefits from Free Loan, etc.] Article 42 of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act / [Donation of Other Profits, etc

Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act / [the calculation method, etc. of profits from free loan, etc.]

2013Nu52911 Revocation of Disposition of Imposition of Gift Tax

Chapter AA

Head of Sungbuk Tax Office

Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2013Guhap54991 decided November 15, 2013

April 16, 2014

May 21, 2014

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

1. Purport of claim

The Defendant’s disposition imposing gift tax on the Plaintiff on June 1, 2012 shall be revoked.

2. Purport of appeal

The judgment of the first instance is revoked. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

1. cite the judgment of the first instance;

The reasons for this court's ruling are as follows: Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, which read that the court's ruling "on January 1, 2003," "on January 1, 2013," which will take place "on January 1, 2013," is the same as the reasons for the court of first instance.

2. Conclusion

The judgment of the first instance is justifiable. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion, and it is so decided as per Disposition.