A debt which has not been confirmed shall not be deducted from the appraised value.

It is unclear whether future corporate tax will be imposed on the difference between the book value that was not determined to be included in the gross income of the above non-party company until the commencement date of inheritance and the market price appraised value, and it cannot be viewed as a debt to be deducted from the appraised

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

1. On May 1, 1995, the part of the tax amount imposed by the defendant against the plaintiffs on May 1, 1991, which exceeds the amount as stated in the item column of legitimate tax amount in the same sight table among the items of inheritance tax imposition as stated in the item of attached Table 1. The portion of the tax amount imposed by the plaintiff on May 1, 1995 is revoked. 2. The remaining claims of the plaintiffs are dismissed on February 3, 1995, and one of them is

1. Details of the disposition;

The following facts are either disputed between the parties, or there is no dispute between Gap evidence 1-2, Gap evidence 2-1-2, Eul evidence 3-1-5, Gap evidence 4-2, Eul evidence 1-1-2, Eul evidence 2-1-2, Eul evidence 6-1-4, Eul evidence 7-1-5, Eul evidence 8-1-2, Eul evidence 9-1-2 and 5-2, and there is no other counter-proof.

A. Nonparty 1 died on April 30, 1991, and his wife and the remaining plaintiffs, who were his children, jointly inherited the deceased’s property.

B. On October 25, 1991, which is within the period for submitting a return under Article 20(1) of the Inheritance Tax Act (amended by Act No. 4410, Nov. 30, 1991; hereinafter referred to as the "Act"), the Plaintiffs considered the value of the inherited property of the above deceased as KRW 5,197,914,30, and added KRW 1,894,750,00 for the aggregate of the taxable value of inheritance taxes under Article 7-2 of the Act; KRW 53,513,506; KRW 60,000 for basic deduction; KRW 10,000 for 30,00 for 40,000 for 50,000 for 50,000 for 50,000 won for 50,000 won for annual installments; the Defendant reported the amount of inheritance tax to 30,074,000 won for annual installments; and the Defendant reported the amount of 1736.

D. On May 20, 1994, the Commissioner of the National Tax Service rendered a decision to correct the amount of withholding income tax of the dividends on title trust to the non-party 5 who was paid by the non-party 1 on March 18, 1991 as deductible from the taxable value of inheritance tax and dismissed the remainder of the claims on April 11, 1995, by deducting the amount of money deposited by the non-party 190,90,000 won under the name of the non-party 1, and some of the amount of inheritance tax imposed by the non-party 215,860,000 (3 financial institutions such as anti-investment financing) and the amount of inheritance tax imposed by the non-party 1 on the non-party 1, 1994 on the non-party 20,000 won (the amount of inheritance tax imposed on the non-party 2,750,000 won on the non-party 2,000 won under the title of the deceased's property.

E. On May 1, 1995, the defendant considered the above stocks as inherited property according to the above decision of the National Tax Tribunal, and calculated the total determined tax amount as stated in the correction increase sheet of attached Form 2. The defendant distributed the remaining tax amount subtracting the voluntarily paid tax amount from the total determined tax amount according to the ratio of inherited property possession by the plaintiffs, and imposed and notified it to the plaintiffs. On June 14, 1996, if the non-listed stocks among inherited property are assessed according to the net asset value assessment method, it would be erroneous to deduct only 1/2 of the total retirement amount as liability, not all retirement benefit amount, as a debt, from the total amount of the determined tax amount, as stated in the correction reduction sheet of attached Form 2. The defendant calculated the final amount of the total determined tax amount and calculated the remaining tax amount after deducting the voluntarily paid tax amount from the total determined tax amount according to the ratio of inherited property possession by the plaintiffs (hereinafter the remaining part of the disposition in this case against the plaintiffs).

2. The parties' assertion

The defendant asserts that the disposition of this case is lawful on the grounds of the above disposition and applicable provisions of law. First, since the plaintiffs' securities inherited by the plaintiffs are non-party corporation, non-party corporation, and non-party corporation, interest industry corporation, and non-party corporation, whose market price is difficult at the time of commencement of inheritance, the price should be calculated objectively and reasonably based on the current status at the time of inheritance through supplementary evaluation methods, etc. under Article 5 (5) 1 (b) of the Enforcement Decree of the Act. Thus, the defendant's failure to deduct the amount of corporate tax to be imposed on the difference between the book value and the market value of the above non-party corporation based on the appraised value in calculating the net asset value, the result of not deducting the items of debt under Article 5 (5) 1 (c) of the Enforcement Decree of the Act in calculating the net asset value. Second, since the inheritance tax is not finalized upon the taxpayer's declaration of tax base and tax amount, it becomes a national tax for which the tax liability becomes finalized at the time of annual payment without any justifiable reason for the plaintiff's return or revised tax amount.

3. Determination

A. Determination as to the assertion on the assessment method of unlisted stocks

(1) The basic facts

The plaintiffs' shares of the non-party company shall be assessed as 5,20,00 won per share, 5,451 shares, and the shares of the non-party interest industry company shall be calculated as 6,421 shares, 10,470 shares, 6,477 shares, which are not listed on the Korea Stock Exchange; 6,421 shares, which shall be calculated as 74,67, 196, 166, 47, 197, 196, 76, 197, 196, 47, 196, 196, 47, 196, 196, 196, 196, 196, 27, 198, 36, 198, 196, 196, 196, 196, 27, 196, 197, 197, 36,

(2) Relevant statutes and the interpretation thereof

Article 9(1) of the Act provides that the value of inherited property shall be calculated based on the current status at the time of commencement of inheritance under Article 9(1) of the Act, while Article 5(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Act provides that the current status at the time of commencement of inheritance shall be calculated based on the current status at the time of commencement of inheritance under Article 9(1) of the Act, and when it is difficult to calculate the market price, the market price shall be calculated based on the methods provided for in paragraphs (2) through (6). According to paragraph (6) 1(b) of the above provision, stocks not listed on the Korea Stock Exchange shall be calculated per share (1) price per share for stocks not listed on the Korea Stock Exchange. (2) (1) price per share (the net asset value of the relevant corporation / total number of issued stocks + the average interest rate as determined by the Ordinance of the Ministry of Finance and Economy in consideration of the average amount of net profit and loss per share / the average interest rate formed in the financial market) / 2) price calculated by the formula.

Meanwhile, Article 5(3) of the Enforcement Decree of the Corporate Tax Act provides for the tax amount to be paid as corporate tax, resident tax and defense tax on the income accrued until the date of commencing the inheritance under subparagraph 1 of Article 5(5) of the Enforcement Decree of the Corporate Tax Act, while Article 5(5)1(c) of the Corporate Tax Act provides that the liabilities under Article 5(1)1(c) of the Enforcement Decree of the Corporate Tax Act shall not include the amount under the following subparagraphs. In light of the above provisions, although the net asset value assessment method among the elements of non-listed stocks or equity shares under Article 5(5)1(b) of the Enforcement Decree of the Corporate Tax Act is not different under the premise that the net asset value assessment method, which is different under the premise that the assets would be liquidated, is not under the so-called liquidation value of the corporation, as well as the net asset value of the corporation under Article 15(1)1(c) of the Corporate Tax Act, it is not under the premise that the net asset value of the corporation should be deducted from the net asset value of the corporation.

Therefore, it is unclear whether future corporate tax will be imposed on the difference between the book value that was not determined to be included in the gross income of the above non-party company until the commencement date of the inheritance and the market value appraised. Thus, it cannot be viewed as the obligation to be deducted from the appraised value under Article 5 (5) 1 (b) and (c) and Article 5 (3) 1 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act. Thus, the defendant's calculation by the supplementary assessment method under Article 5 (5) 1 (b) of the Enforcement Decree of the Act without considering the amount equivalent to corporate tax on the difference between the book value and the market value of the above non-party company's assets as above as the item of the debt. Therefore, the plaintiffs' above assertion is groundless.

B. Whether a report or an additional tax is imposed excessively

(1) The basic facts

On April 30, 1991, non-party 1 and his wife and children jointly inherited property, the plaintiff 2,783,144,643 won as the representative on October 25, 1991 and applied for permission from the defendant for annual installments of 2,779,14,643 won out of the amount of tax to be paid, after the plaintiff 1's wife and children jointly inherited property, the defendant decided the above tax base and calculated tax amount as of June 14, 1996, 11,987, 196, 196, 462 won, and the difference between the amount reported by the plaintiffs 2,40,56,014 won and the amount reported by the plaintiff 2,30,960,396,30,96,97,97,49,000 won and the amount reported by the plaintiff 2,96,196,30,000 won and the amount reported by annual installments of 15,96,396,5.

(2) Relevant statutes

Article 26 (1) of the Act provides that, where inherited property (including donated property added to inherited property pursuant to the provisions of Article 4) is not reported within the period for return under the provisions of Article 20 or is reported short of the tax base, an amount equivalent to 20/100 of the amount calculated by multiplying the inheritance tax amount determined pursuant to the provisions of Article 25 shall be added to the inheritance tax amount. Article 20 (1) of the Act provides that an heir or a testamentary donee shall submit a statement stating the types, quantity and value of inherited property to be added to inheritance tax and other matters prescribed by the Presidential Decree within 6 months from the date on which the commencement of inheritance tax is known to the Government. Article 20-2 (1) of the Act provides that an application for tax payment by annual installments shall be submitted within the period prescribed in Article 20 (1) of the Act. Article 20-2 (2) provides that, where a person who makes a return pursuant to the provisions of Article 20 (1) fails to pay the tax amount by annual installments, an amount less the following amount shall be paid by annual installments within the period prescribed in Article 28.

(3) The plaintiffs' assertion

First, the plaintiffs can impose additional taxes if breach of duty under tax law is due to the taxpayer's responsible reason. The non-listed stocks are not at market prices and are difficult to find transaction practices. Thus, it is difficult for the government to set uniform evaluation standards. However, a general taxpayer who is not an expert can not properly make such evaluation, and therefore, a taxpayer can not be deemed to fulfill his duty by properly reporting the object of taxation. The difference in the appraised value cannot be attributable to the taxpayer. Article 26 (1) of the Inheritance Tax Act amended by Act No. 4662 of December 31, 1993 excludes the amount of the reported inherited property which is short of the tax base to be reported due to the difference in the appraised value, so long as the plaintiffs reported the non-listed stocks of this case as inherited property within the original return period, it is not attributable to the plaintiffs, and thus, it is unlawful to impose additional taxes on the difference in annual payment before the return of annual payment, and it is not determined that the government made a final decision on the amount of annual payment before the return of annual payment.

(3) Determination

First of all, in order to ensure the propriety of taxation, additional tax returns are a kind of administrative punishment imposed when a taxpayer is liable to pay taxes in good faith and neglects to perform his/her duties in order to secure the propriety of taxation. Such sanctions can not be imposed in cases where there are circumstances where a taxpayer cannot be deemed to have known of his/her duties, or where there are circumstances where it is unreasonable to expect the relevant party to fulfill his/her duties, or where there are justifiable reasons that make it difficult for the taxpayer to neglect his/her duties (see Supreme Court Decision 92Nu2936, 2943, Oct. 23, 1992). However, under Article 20(1) of the Act and Article 13(1)9 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act, the heir is not obliged to pay inheritance taxes in return for inheritance and the amount of inheritance taxes to be imposed, and it cannot be viewed that there is no clear difference between the duty to pay taxes and the amount of non-listed stocks to be assessed in accordance with the law as stated above.

However, as seen earlier, the tax base of the inheritance tax of this case for which the defendant finally investigated and determined as to the amount of the additional tax on negligent tax returns is KRW 11,987,196,462, and KRW 6,370,958,054 for the calculated tax amount, and KRW 6,026,150,794 for the amount reported as the tax base by the plaintiffs. Thus, if the amount was calculated for the additional tax on negligent tax returns according to the calculation method under Article 26(1) of the Act, it is clear that the amount is calculated for the amount below 63,635,596 won (=6,370,958,054 won) according to the calculation method under Article 26(1) of the Act.

Then, the plaintiff's second argument that the inheritance tax is not determined by the taxpayer's report, but by the government's original investigation and determination, Articles 20 (1), 20-2 (2) 3, and 26 (2) of the Act provide that a taxpayer of inheritance tax shall file a return of inheritance tax within six months from the date on which the commencement of inheritance is known, and shall pay an amount calculated by deducting an amount, etc. applied for annual payment from the reported tax amount within that period, and where such amount is not paid or below that to be paid within that period, additional tax on additional payment of inheritance tax is an administrative penalty imposed in the form of tax for the purpose of making a voluntary return of inheritance tax within the prescribed period of inheritance tax and securing the performance of the duty to pay the reported amount of tax. Thus, since the defendant did not impose an additional additional additional tax on the portion of inheritance tax permitted for annual payment upon the plaintiffs' request, the plaintiffs' application for additional tax on annual payment cannot be made within the prescribed period of tax assessment under the proviso to Article 28 (1) of the Act.

Therefore, the above second argument is groundless on the different premise.

(c) Justifiable tax amount;

As seen earlier, the portion exceeding KRW 633,635,596 as the additional tax on negligent tax returns among the dispositions in this case is illegal. Accordingly, when calculating the reasonable tax amount against the plaintiffs based on this, the amount of tax calculated is KRW 7,293,980,039 in total as shown in the column for the amount recognized as a party member on the tax calculation table in attached Form 2. Since the Plaintiffs’ respective shares in the total amount of inheritance tax are identical to the entry in the column for the share ratio in the amount of tax in attached Form 1. Accordingly, if calculating the specific amount of inheritance tax by each Plaintiff, it is as shown in the column for

Therefore, the disposition of this case rendered by the defendant against the plaintiffs is legitimate only within the scope of the legitimate tax amount of the above recognition, and all parts exceeding the legitimate tax amount cannot be exempted from each revocation because they are unlawful.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiffs' claim of this case is justified within the scope of the above recognition, and the remaining claims are dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.