Seocho 209west 2849 ( November 20, 2009)

Where the taxable value of donated property and the tax base are not reported, penalty tax;

For the portion donated by two or more persons, the total taxable value and tax base of the gift tax are not reported, and even if each donor reported each of them, it is unreasonable to impose penalty tax in bad faith because it is difficult to deem that the reported tax base falls short

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

1. The part of the Defendant’s imposition of gift tax of KRW 14,145,00 against the Plaintiff on July 1, 200, exceeding KRW 10,945,00, shall be revoked.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The plaintiff's status

On May 20, 2008, the Plaintiff received from his father ChoiA, her motherB, a donation on May 20, 2008 (hereinafter “the apartment of this case”) Nos. 301, 1903 (hereinafter “the apartment of this case”), and completed the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the Plaintiff on the same day.

B. Reporting the Plaintiff’s taxable value, tax base, etc., and determining and notifying the Defendant’s gift tax

(1) On August 19, 2008, the Plaintiff filed a separate report, without adding up the taxable value and tax base of gift tax, on the 1/2 shares donated by the leastA and the 1/2 shares donated by the B among the instant apartment buildings, as indicated below, and paid KRW 48.6 million in total, without adding up the taxable value and tax base of gift tax.

(2) On July 1, 2009, the defendant reported 14,145,00 won (i.e., 5,860,000 won + additional tax for underreporting 320,000 won + 945,000 won for underreporting - 4860,000 won) as stated below: "O disposition"; "The plaintiff reported 300,000 won for underreporting 400,000 won under the former Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act (amended by Act No. 9916, Jan. 1, 2010; hereinafter "Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act") 】 1.00,000 won for underreporting 60,000 won for underreporting 20,000 won for underreporting 3,000,000 won for underreporting 1,000,000 won for underreporting 61,000,000 won for tax base of gift tax.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 to 7 evidence, Eul 1 to 3, Eul 2-1 to 2-2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The Plaintiff, by mistake, did not file a report on the aggregate of the taxable value and tax base of gift tax on the portion donated by the LA among the instant apartment buildings and the portion donated by the BB, and the reported tax base does not fall under cases where the Plaintiff failed to file a report on the tax base because there is no substantial difference in the tax base to be reported pursuant to the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act. Therefore, the amount of penalty tax for underreporting, which the Plaintiff deemed to fall short

(b) Related statutes;

It is as shown in the attached Table related statutes.

C. Determination

(1) Legal principles

Articles 47(2), 58(1), and 68(1) of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act provide that in cases where the total amount of donated property received from the same person (including the spouse of a lineal ascendant, if the donor is a lineal ascendant) within ten years prior to the date of the relevant donation is at least 10,000 won, the total value of donated property shall be the taxable value of donated property; and in such cases, the person liable to pay the gift tax shall file a return on the tax base based on it, but in such cases, the amount obtained by deducting the amount paid or to be paid for the value of the previous donated property from the amount calculated by applying

The purport of the above provision is to prevent the act of donation by dividing the number of real estate subject to progressive tax rates by the comprehensive taxation of the same person and dividing the number of real estate subject to progressive tax rates into one and the number of real estate subject to progressive tax rates by the comprehensive taxation of the same person, as it constitutes separate taxation requirements for each individual gift act.

(2) In full view of the above facts and the following circumstances revealed in the present argument, even if the Plaintiff did not file a return on the sum of the taxable value and tax base of gift tax pursuant to Articles 47(2) and 68(1) of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act with respect to the portion donated by the LA among the apartment of this case and the portion donated by the B, it is difficult to deem that the Plaintiff did not meet the tax base under Article 47-3(1) of the former Framework Act on National Taxes and filed

O) On May 20, 2008, the Plaintiff received the donation of the instant apartment, and on August 19, 2008, filed a separate report on the taxable value and tax base of the gift tax separately by making the donor a maximumA and this BB. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s report on the gift tax cannot be deemed as contrary to the purport of Article 47(2) of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act to prevent the donation of real estate by dividing it without making a single donation on one occasion of damage to the progressive tax rate.

O The Plaintiff, on August 19, 2008, declared each tax base of KRW 185 million on the basis of the donor as LA and EB by making the donor the donor as LA and EB, and the aggregate amount is equal to the legitimate tax base of KRW 370 million. Therefore, it is difficult to view that the Plaintiff actually failed to meet the tax base.

O The Plaintiff did not report the aggregate amount because it did not fall short of the tax base and did not report the aggregate amount, but instead deducted the aggregate tax amount of KRW 10 million for each donor when applying the gift tax rate to the tax base respectively, thereby committing an error in calculating the gift tax amount. This constitutes a reason for the taxing authority to determine the tax base and tax amount pursuant to Article 76(1) of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act, and cannot be said to be subject to the application of the penalty

(2) Sub-determinations: 10,945,00 of the instant disposition (i.e., gift tax amounting to KRW 14,145,00; KRW 3.2 million of under-reported penalty tax) is unlawful.

3. Conclusion

The plaintiff's claim of this case is justified and accepted.