logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2015. 01. 15. 선고 2014두13010 판결
(심리불속행) 조세회피목적이 없었다고 보기에 부족하여 명의신탁증여의제 증여세 과세처분은 정당함[국승]
Case Number of the immediately preceding lawsuit

Seoul High Court 2013Nu24350 (2014.09.02)

Case Number of the previous trial

2010west 1768,1771 ( October 23, 2012)

Title

(C) If it is insufficient to deem that there was no tax avoidance purpose, the taxation of gift tax on constructive gift of title trust is legitimate.

Summary

(C) As to the acquisition of new shares, the acquisition of new shares acquired under the name of another person by participating in the third allocation of new shares in return for the transfer of shares constitutes a separate title trust, separate from the transfer shares, and thus, it is insufficient to recognize that there was no tax avoidance purpose.

Related statutes

Donation of trust property under Article 45-2 of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act

Article 60 of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act:

Cases

2014Du13010

Plaintiff-Appellee

EA et al.

Defendant-Appellant

Head of the tax office of distribution and one other

Judgment of the lower court

on October 1, 2014

Imposition of Judgment

on 15, 2015

Text

All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

All of the records of this case and the judgment of the court below and the grounds of appeal were examined, but the grounds of appeal by the appellant are not included in the grounds provided for in each subparagraph of Article 4(1) of the Special Act on the Procedure for Appeal. Thus, all of the appeals are dismissed pursuant to Article 5 of the same Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent

arrow