In a transaction with a corporation, etc., where the actual transaction price at the time of acquisition is not confirmed, the transfer price shall be based on the actual transaction price, and the acquisition price is confirmed after the tax base and tax amount at the time of acquisition based on the preliminary return on the gains on transfer of assets or the final return on the tax base calculated on the gains on transfer calculated on the basis of the conversion price, whether both the transfer price and the acquisition

According to Articles 23(4), 45(1)1, 117 through 120, and 127 of the former Income Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 12767 of Aug. 1, 1989), and Articles 170(1) and (4), and 115(1)1(c), etc. of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 12767 of the same Act of Aug. 1, 1989), “Where the actual transaction price at the time of transfer or acquisition is confirmed in the transaction with the State, a local government, or other corporation” under Article 170(4)1 of the former Income Tax Act (amended by Act No. 4281 of Dec. 31, 1990), the transferor may, where the actual transaction price at the time of transfer or acquisition is confirmed only on the ground that the actual transaction price at the time of transfer or acquisition is not confirmed on the basis that the actual transaction price at the time of transfer or transfer price is determined on the basis.

Articles 23(4), 45(1)1, 117 through 120, and 127 of the former Income Tax Act (amended by Act No. 4281 of Dec. 31, 1990), Articles 170(1) and (4), and 115(1)1(c) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 12767 of Aug. 1, 1989)

Supreme Court Decision 81Nu105 Decided March 26, 1985 (Gong1985,630) 88Nu2519 Decided October 13, 1989 (Gong1989,1695) decided November 28, 1989 (Gong1990,166)

[Defendant-Appellant] Plaintiff 1 et al., Counsel for defendant-appellant-appellant

Head of Taecheon Tax Office

Seoul High Court Decision 89Gu11901 delivered on October 23, 1990

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

We examine the grounds of appeal by the Plaintiff’s attorney.

Article 23(4), 45(1)1, 17 through 120, 127, and 127 of the Income Tax Act before it was amended by Act No. 4281, Dec. 31, 1990; Article 170(1) and (4) and Article 115(1)1(c) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act before it was amended by Presidential Decree No. 12767; Article 170(4)1(c) of the same Act provides that "where it is confirmed that the actual transaction price at the time of transfer or acquisition with the State, local government, or other juristic person" as provided in subparagraph 1 of Article 170(4) of the same Act; Article 97(1)1 of the same Act provides that "the actual transaction price at the time of its declaration shall not be confirmed only on the grounds that the actual transaction price at the time of its transfer; and Article 100(1)58 of the same Act provides that the transfer price at the time of assets shall be calculated on the actual transaction price;

The Supreme Court Decision 89Nu4901 Decided June 22, 1990 rendered by the party members of the lawsuit is not appropriate to be invoked in this case.

Therefore, the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed, and all costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Yoon Jae-ho (Presiding Justice)