Suwon District Court 2012Guhap8237 ( December 05, 2012)

The early 2011 High Court 0422

It is reasonable to deem that the transfer of title is completed according to the agreement on title trust.

(1) It is reasonable to deem that the transfer of title to a title trust is completed by an agreement on title trust in full view of the fact that the title was not trusted by the Board of Audit and Inspection in response to the initial disposition and the fact that the title was not trusted by the Board of Audit and Inspection.

2013Nu804 Revocation of Disposition of Imposition of Gift Tax

HongA

2. One other than the director of the tax office

Suwon District Court Decision 2012Guhap8237 Decided December 5, 2012

June 5, 2013

July 3, 2013

1. All appeals filed by the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) against the Defendants are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff (Appointed Party).

The decision of the court of first instance shall be revoked. The decision of the court of first instance rendered by the head of Leecheon Tax Office on December 1, 2009 is revoked. Each disposition of KRW 000 gift tax for the year 2003 that the director of the court of first instance decided on 1 December 2003 against the designated person HongB, and KRW 000 gift tax for the year 200 which the director of the court of first instance decided on December 1, 2009 against the designated person Doddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

"This Court's reasoning, and the plaintiff (designated parties, and hereinafter referred to as the plaintiff)'s argument that this Court emphasizes or unsatisfys this Court, are the same as the reasons stated in the judgment of the court of first instance, except for addition in the following paragraphs, and this Court's reasoning is cited in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act, Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, and Article 420 of the

The plaintiff, while borrowing 0 U.S.C. 1, 20 U.S.C. 1, 20 U.S.C. 1, 30 U.S.C. 1, 30 U.S.C. 1, 30 U.S.C. 20 U.S.C. 1, 10 U.S.C. 20 U.S.C. 20 U.S.C. 1, 10 U.S.C. 10 U.S.C. 1, 200 U.S.C. 10 U.S.C. 1, 200.C. 8 U.S.C. 1, 200.C. 1, 30 U.S.C. 1, 200.C. 3, U.S.C. 1, and 300 U.S.C.E. 1, 200.C. 1, 2000.

3. Conclusion

Thus, the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit.