Seocho 2013west 3466 ( December 27, 2013)

Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act that takes the security deposit as the value of the building under Article 66 of the same Act is legitimate.

Article 66 of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act provides that "The value of the property for which the mortgage, etc. has been created shall be the larger of the value assessed based on the amount of the claim secured by the property (the amount of the lease deposit in the case of the leased property) and the value assessed under Article 60, whichever is relevant, as special cases for the appraisal of the property on which the mortgage, etc. has been created (including the leased

Article 60 of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act; Article 66 of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act

2014Guhap54608 Revocation of Disposition of Levying Inheritance Tax

KimA

The director of the tax office of Luxembourg

August 28, 2014

October 16, 2014

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Cheong-gu Office

On April 5, 2013, the Defendant revoked the imposition of the inheritance tax OOOO on the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

(1) On July 2, 2010, the Plaintiff succeeded to a building, land, deposit, etc. including OO-dong 827-57 above 3rd floor (hereinafter “instant building”) owned by the Deceased, and thereafter, the value of the instant building and its site divided by the standard market price of the land and the instant building shall be the value of the inherited property. O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O(O-O-O-O-28.

Facts without any dispute, Gap's 1 through 4, the purport of the whole pleadings, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

(1) In principle, the value of inherited property is equivalent to the market price as of the date of inheritance. In a case where a lease contract is concluded by setting the amount much exceeding the actual value of the pertinent property as the rental deposit, Article 66 of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act and Article 63(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act cannot be applied. The appraised value of the instant building that the Plaintiff received by requesting two appraisal corporations shall not exceed half of the amount of lease deposit OOO(CC) and OOOO(DD appraisal corporations). Therefore, the instant disposition that is based on the rental deposit is unlawful.

(2) The site of the instant building (hereinafter “instant land”) was owned by the Plaintiff prior to the commencement of the inheritance. The deposit OOOO of the instant building should be calculated in proportion to the value of the building and the site in accordance with Article 50(8)2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act or Article 63(1)2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act, but the instant disposition that deemed the entire deposit as the deposit money for the building is unlawful.

In addition to the entry of "attached Acts and subordinate statutes", c. fact of recognition.

(1) The instant building is a multi-household housing of the first and third floor above the ground. At the time of inheritance, a lease contract was concluded for 11 households as indicated below, and a lease contract between each lessee and each lessee was concluded in the name of the deceased.

[Attachment] Omission

(2) In filing a report on inheritance on July 2, 2010, the Plaintiff calculated the amount obtained by deducting the deceased’s debts OOOO (including OOOO on the instant building) from the total value of inherited property, as the taxable value of inherited property, and reported the inheritance tax.

Facts without any dispute, Gap evidence 2, Eul evidence 1 through 3, the purport of the whole pleadings, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

D. Determination

(1) Pursuant to Article 66 of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act, the term “the value of the instant building is legitimate; however, Article 60 of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act provides for the legal fiction of the market value based on complementary methods if it is difficult to calculate the market value. Meanwhile, Article 66 of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act provides that the value of the instant building assessed on the basis of the amount of the claim secured by the mortgage (including the leased property) and the value of the instant property shall be the value of the instant property, notwithstanding Article 60, in cases where the value of the instant property is assessed on the basis of the amount of the claim secured by the mortgage (the lease deposit amount in the case of the leased property). The purport of this provision is to prevent the Plaintiff from being deducted from the actual value of the instant building, because there is no possibility that the owner may evade inheritance tax after being deducted from the taxable value of the instant property. Therefore, it is reasonable to view that the value of the instant building is equivalent to the value of the instant property acquired by the O or O as the inheritance value of the instant property.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.