The meaning of "acquisition of shares" under Article 105 (6) of the former Local Tax Act (Act No. 2593, Mar. 12, 1973)

The acquisition of shares under Article 105 (6) of the former Local Tax Act (Act No. 2593, Mar. 12, 1973) includes not only the acquisition by succession of shares, but also the acquisition by the original shareholder of the shares after payment of the capital and acquisition of shares.

Article 105 (6) of the former Local Tax Act (Law No. 2593, Mar. 12, 1973)

Supreme Court Decision 77Nu88 delivered on January 8, 197

Plaintiff 1 and 3 others, Attorneys Cho Jong-il, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant

Head of Gwanak-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City

Seoul High Court Decision 78Gu107 delivered on June 13, 1978

The original judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

The grounds of appeal by Defendant Litigation Performers are examined.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, according to Article 105 (6) of the former Local Tax Act (Act No. 2593, Mar. 12, 1973), the court below stated that the acquisition tax shall be imposed on the oligopolistic shareholder by acquiring the stocks or shares of the corporation, and when the oligopolistic shareholder becomes an oligopolistic shareholder pursuant to Article 23 (3) by deeming that the oligopolistic shareholder has acquired the real estate, vehicles, heavy skills, or standing timber of the corporation. This provision is not a provision on the oligopolistic shareholder before acquiring the specific property which causes the increase in capital of the corporation, but is a provision on the acquisition by succession of the shares or shares of the existing corporation, and it shall be imposed on the person newly becoming an oligopolistic shareholder by acquiring the shares or shares of the existing corporation and deeming the acquisition tax to have been acquired by the oligopolistic shareholder as the oligopolistic shareholder at the time of the newly becoming an oligopolistic shareholder, and it shall be determined that the plaintiffs, the plaintiffs, 1, 2, 3, and 4 of the above oligopolistic shareholder was the oligopolistic shareholder, and it shall be applied at the above 100000 shares and Do10000.

However, the provision of Article 105 (6) of the former Local Tax Act provides that when an oligopolistic stockholder becomes an oligopolistic stockholder pursuant to Article 23 (3) of the same Act by acquiring or acquiring the stocks or shares of a corporation, he shall be deemed to have acquired the real estate, a vehicle, a middle or standing timber of the corporation concerned. Here, the acquisition of shares includes not only the acquisition by succession of the stocks issued by the original stockholder but also the acquisition by transfer of the stocks in capital and the acquisition of the stocks (see Supreme Court Decision 77Nu88 delivered on January 8, 197). Thus, even if an oligopolistic stockholder becomes an oligopolistic stockholder from the time of incorporation, it shall be deemed to have acquired the existing assets of the corporation concerned at the time of the incorporation of the oligopolistic stockholder, and it is unclear that the above oligopolistic stockholder acquired the real estate at the same time with the establishment of the company concerned, and even if the records were determined, it cannot be found that the above oligopolistic stockholder was unlawful since the establishment of the company in this case.

Therefore, the appeal of this case is with merit, and therefore, in accordance with Articles 400 and 406(1) of the Civil Procedure Act, the original judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Seoul High Court. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Min Jae-chul (Presiding Justice)