A. In the case of a simple title trust, whether the provision on deemed donation under Article 32-2 of the former Income Tax Act (amended by Act No. 3474 of Dec. 31, 1981) applies to the case of a simple title trust

(b) Requirements for application of the provision on deemed donation under Article 32-2 of the Inheritance Tax Act;

A. Presumption of deemed donation under Article 32-2 of the former Inheritance Tax Act (amended by Act No. 3474, Dec. 31, 1981) is the purport that in a case where the trust property under Article 1(2) of the Trust Act is a public notice of trust under Article 3 of the same Act, that is, in a case where the trust property is not registered or recorded in the register of shareholders or the register of shareholders, or is not entered in the register of shareholders, it shall be deemed that the trust property is donated to the trustee. Therefore, in a case of a simple title trust other than a trust under the Trust Act,

(b) The provision on the constructive gift under Article 32-2 of the Inheritance Tax Act shall apply only where the actual owner and the nominal owner are different, and where the registration, etc. in the name of the nominal owner are made with an agreement between the actual owner and the nominal owner or with the consent of the nominal owner, and where the actual owner impairs registration, etc. in the name of the nominal owner

A. Article 32-2(b) of the former Inheritance Tax Act (amended by Act No. 3474 of Dec. 31, 1981)

A. Supreme Court Decision 85Nu226 delivered on September 10, 1985, Supreme Court Decision 85Nu891 delivered on November 25, 1986, Supreme Court Decision 86Nu205 delivered on April 28, 1987, Supreme Court Decision 86Nu290 delivered on October 14, 1986, Supreme Court Decision 85Nu955 delivered on February 10, 1987, Supreme Court Decision 86Nu205 delivered on April 28, 1987 (Dong)

Plaintiff

Head of the Southern Mine District Office

Gwangju High Court Decision 84Gu86 delivered on April 9, 1985

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. The legal fiction of donation stipulated in Article 32-2 of the former Inheritance Tax Act (amended by Act No. 3474, Dec. 31, 1981); the purport of Article 32-2 of the same Act is that, with respect to trust property stipulated in Article 1(2) of the same Act, in cases where trust property is publicly notified or registered, that is, where trust property is not registered or recorded in the register of shareholders or the register of bonds, or where it is not entered in the register of shareholders, it shall be deemed that the trust property is donated to the trustee. Therefore, in cases of simple title trust, other than trust under the Trust Act, there is no room to apply the provision on the legal fiction of donation under the former Inheritance Tax Act (see Supreme Court Decision 85Nu891, Nov. 25, 1986; 98Da3474, Dec. 31, 1981; 98-2, where the title holder and the de facto owner are different from the actual owner, regardless of the actual owner or the title owner.

2. According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below, based on its adopted evidence, found that the plaintiff was registered as 100 share holders on the register of reputation engineering for the non-party corporation as of January 29, 1981, and as 15,00 share holders on the register of reputation food for the non-party corporation as of February 12, 1982. However, although the chairperson of ○○ Group, the actual owner of each of the above shares, ○○ Group Chairperson, i.e., e., the non-party 15,00 share shares of the company, i.e., the non-party 15,00 share shares on the list of shareholders of the non-party corporation as of February 12, 1982, the non-party 200 share shares i.e., the non-party i., the share shares i., the non-party i.e., the company's shares and the non-party i., the company's shares were recorded in its own name without prior notice or consent.

3. Therefore, the appeal shall be dismissed, and all costs of appeal shall be assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Lee Jin-Post (Presiding Justice)