When calculating the value of donation, the Enforcement Decree beyond the market price of the parent law shall be null and void.

"Special Cases concerning the Assessment of Property on which a mortgage, etc. is created" (before December 28, 1998), is applicable only to the property inherited, and it is unreasonable to apply the same to the donated property";

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

Suwon District Court Decision 99Gu7036 delivered on March 22, 2000

1. The judgment of the first instance court is modified as follows. The defendant's disposition of imposition of KRW 33,339,900 each of the gift tax of 1997 against the plaintiffs on September 12, 1998 shall be revoked, respectively.The total costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant.

1. Circumstances of each disposition of this case;

The following facts may be acknowledged if there is no dispute between the parties, or if it is collected from each description of evidence No. 1 to No. 4, evidence No. 1 to No. 4, evidence No. 1 to No. 4, and evidence No. 1 to No. 4, and there is no counter-proof.

"가. 원고들은 1997. 1. 21. 소외 김ㅇㅇ으로부터 그 소유인 ㅇㅇ시 ㅇㅇ구 ㅇㅇ동 ㅇㅇ 대 1,013㎡(이하이 사건 토지'라고 한다) 및 그 지상 건물 469.58㎡ 중 각 1/3 지분을 각 증여받고, 1997. 4. 8.경 이 사건 토지에 대하여는 개별공시지가(㎡당 금 1,800,000원)를, 위 건물에 대하여는 지방세법상의 시가표준액을 각 적용하여 증여세과세가액을 금 636,693,320원(= 토지부분 금 606,180,000원 + 건물부분 금 30,513,000원)으로 산정하여 증여세를 각 신고, 납부하였다.", "나. 피고는 원고들의 이 사건 토지에 대한 위 평가, 신고액을 부인한 후 이 사건 토지에 대하여 상속세및증여세법(1996. 12. 30. 법률 제5193호로 전문개정되어 1998. 12. 28. 법률 제5582호로 개정되기 전의 것, 이하법'이라고 한다) 제66조 제1호, 같은 법 시행령(1996. 12. 31. 대통령령 제15193호로 전문개정되어 1998. 12. 31. 대통령령 제15971호로 개정되기 전의 것, 이하시행령'이라고 한다) 제63조 제3호에 따라 이 사건 토지에 관하여 소외 주식회사 ㅇㅇ은행이 1993. 3. 15. 근저당권을 설정받을 당시 감정평가기관인 한국감정원의 감정평가액인 금 707,210,000원(㎡당 금 2,100,000원)이 개별공시지가로 평가한 토지가액인 금 606,180,000원보다 크다는 이유로 그 차액인 금 101,030,000원(= 금 707,210,000 - 금 606,180,000)을 증여세 과세가액에 가산하고, 법 제78조 제2항 소정의 납부불성실가산세 금 3,030,900원을 가산한 후 자진납부세액 및 당초 결정고지한 세액을 공제하여, 1998. 9. 12. 원고들에게 추가로 각 금 33,339,900원의 증여세를 결정, 고지하였다(이하이 사건 각 처분'이라고 한다).",2. 이 사건 각 처분의 적법여부

A. The parties' assertion

"The defendant asserts that each disposition of this case is legitimate in accordance with the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes. As Article 66 of the Act provides that the appraisal of the property shall not be extended and applied to the appraisal of the property because the plaintiffs are the provisions on the appraisal of the property. ② Article 66 of the Act provides that the value assessed in accordance with the Presidential Decree based on the amount of claims secured by the property shall be the value of the property, which is the larger of the value assessed in accordance with the provisions of Article 60 of the Act. However, Article 63 subparagraph 3 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act provides that the appraisal of the property is a property on which the right to collateral security is established and the appraisal of the property is made by the appraisal business operator in accordance with the rate of appraisal of the land price and the appraisal of the property to establish the right to collateral security, the determination of the value of the property is made based on the value of the property which is not related to the amount of claims secured by the property is in violation of the superior law, and thus, the appraisal of each disposition of this case based on the provision of the above invalid Enforcement Decree is unlawful.

Attached Form is as shown in the attached Form.

C. Determination

Under the principle of tax law, the interpretation of tax law shall be interpreted as a statutory interpretation, and it shall not be permitted to expand or analogically interpret without any justifiable reason. In principle, as stipulated in Article 60 of the Act, the value of the property on which inheritance tax and gift tax are levied shall be based on the market price as of the commencing date of inheritance or the donation date as stipulated in the above Article 60 of the Act. However, in cases where it is difficult to calculate the market price, the value shall be assessed according to the valuation methods stipulated in Articles 61 through 65 of the Act exceptionally. However, Article 66 of the Act provides, notwithstanding the provisions of Article 60 of the Act, a special provision which provides that the higher amount between the value appraised by the pertinent property as prescribed by the Presidential Decree based on the amount of the claim secured by the mortgage and the value appraised by the provisions of Article 60 of the Act shall be the value of the pertinent property. Article 66 of the Act provides that the above 30th of the 90th of the 90th of the 90th of the above 90th of the above 19th of the Reasons for Disposition No.

Therefore, since each of the dispositions of this case should be revoked in an unlawful manner, the plaintiffs' claims seeking such dispositions should be accepted on the grounds of their own reasoning. Since the judgment of the first instance is unfair on the grounds of some different conclusions, it is so decided as per Disposition by accepting the plaintiffs' appeal and changing the judgment of the first instance court as above.