A. Whether the remaining inheritors need to go through the same pre-trial procedure where the representative of the co-inheritors has gone through the pre-trial procedure regarding the imposition of inheritance tax (negative)

(b) Method of notice of inheritance tax payment to co-inheritors;

A. In the case of joint inheritance, an objection against the imposition of inheritance tax shall be filed by each inheritor on his/her duty to pay the inheritance tax, in principle, if the person who is entitled to receive a notification of the tax base and tax amount of inheritance on behalf of the co-inheritors receives a notification and under the pre-trial procedure on behalf of the co-inheritors, the remaining inheritors need not undergo the same pre-trial procedure. This also applies to cases where the tax authority notifies not only the person who is entitled to receive a notification on behalf of

B. In issuing a tax notice to co-inheritors, the tax assessment disposition that specifies the imposed tax amount corresponding to the portion of the share of the co-inheritors, as well as the name of the co-inheritors who are liable for tax payment, as well as the amount of tax imposed according to the share of the share of the share of each taxpayer is unlawful.

(a)Article 25-2(a) of the Inheritance Tax Act: Article 19(2) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act; Article 18(1) of the Administrative Litigation Act; Article 55 of the Framework Act on National Taxes; Article 9 of the National Tax Collection Act; Article 19(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance

A. Supreme Court Decision 89Nu923 delivered on January 23, 1990 (Gong1990, 567) b. 87Nu545 delivered on November 22, 198 (Gong1989, 27) 90Nu4198 delivered on October 30, 1990 (Gong190, 2470) 90Nu7401 delivered on April 9, 1991 (Gong191, 2511)

Plaintiff 1 and 6 others, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellee

The Director of Gangnam District Office

Seoul High Court Decision 91Gu935 delivered on December 23, 1992

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

1. In the case of joint inheritance, an objection against the imposition of inheritance tax shall be based on the principle that each inheritor files a lawsuit against the amount of his/her tax liable. However, in the pre-trial procedure, such as a request for examination and a request for trial, if a person who is entitled to receive a notification of the tax base and amount of inheritance tax on behalf of co-inheritors receives such notification and goes through the pre-trial procedure, the remaining inheritors need not undergo the same pre-trial procedure. This legal principle also applies where the tax authority notifies all inheritors, not only those who are entitled to receive notification on behalf of inheritors, but also all successors (see Supreme Court Decision 89Nu923, Jan. 23,

In the same purport, the court below is just in holding that the remaining plaintiffs do not need to go through the pre-trial procedure as long as plaintiffs 1 et al. had gone through the pre-trial procedure on behalf of the plaintiffs as family successors, and there is no error of law by misunderstanding legal principles as to the pre-trial procedure of the disposition of inheritance tax

2. When the tax office issues a tax notice to co-inheritors, it is unlawful that the tax office specified the amount of tax imposed which is subdivided corresponding to the share of each of the co-inheritors as well as the name of the co-inheritors who are liable to pay the tax in the tax notice, and written or attached a statement of the grounds for calculation thereof, and that such written or attached tax disposition omitted is unlawful (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 87Nu545, Nov. 22, 198; 87Nu7401, Apr. 9, 1991; 90Nu7401, Apr. 9,

According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, the court below found that the defendant's taxation disposition of this case against the plaintiffs stated the plaintiffs as "non-party 1 and six co-inheritors" without entering the amount of each tax to be borne by them and the details of their calculation, and that the amount of taxation was not a dispute over the fact that the amount of taxation was served to each plaintiffs by stating the total amount of inheritance tax imposed on the plaintiffs, and that the taxation disposition of this case was unlawful. In light of the records and records, the court below's above fact-finding and determination of the court below is just and it did not err in the misapprehension of legal principles as to mistake of facts due to violation of the rules of evidence, revocation of confession and notice of tax payment

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)