Where a public-service corporation acquires real estate with an asset contributed by the contributor for the purpose of having him/her operate an educational institution prescribed by the Education Act and entrusts the operation of the kindergarten to the contributor or directly operates the kindergarten in the real estate, the case excluding the object of inclusion of the taxable value of donated property in the calculation of the taxable value of donated property on the ground that the contributor used the

Where a public-service corporation acquires real estate with an asset contributed by the contributor for the purpose of operating an educational institution prescribed by the Education Act and entrusts the operation of a kindergarten to the contributor or directly operates the kindergarten in the real estate, the case excluding the property contributed by the contributor for public-service projects from the object of inclusion in the taxable value of donated property, on the ground that the contributor used it for the purpose

Article 8-2(1)1 of the former Inheritance Tax Act (amended by Act No. 5193 of Dec. 30, 1996), Article 8-2(1)1 of the same Act (see Articles 16(1) and 48(1)1 of the current Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act), Article 34-7 of the current Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act, Article 34-2(2) of the Addenda (amended by Presidential Decree No. 1469 of Dec. 22, 1994), Article 3-2(2) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 1469 of Dec. 31, 1994), Article 3-2(6) (see Article 38(2) of the current Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act), Article 3-7(7)7 of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act (see Article 39(2) of the current Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act), and Article 42 of the same Act

Original Scholarship Association (Attorney Jeong Sung-sung et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

The head of Yangcheon Tax Office

Seoul High Court Decision 97Gu3851 delivered on August 18, 1998

The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, the plaintiff 1 (hereinafter referred to as "the deceased") was entrusted to the plaintiff 2 under the name of the 3-year educational institution under the former Education Act (repealed by Article 2 of the Addenda of the Framework Act on Education, Act No. 5437, Dec. 13, 1997) by the 3-year educational institution under the name of the 19-year educational institution under the 19-year educational program under the 3-year educational program under the 196-year educational program under the 19-year educational program under the 3-year educational program under the 19-year educational program under the 19-year educational program, and the plaintiff continued to use the real estate under the 19-year educational program under the 3-year educational program under the 19-year educational program under the 19-year educational program under the 4-year educational program under the 19-year educational program under the 19-year educational program under the 19-year educational program.

In light of the records, the above fact-finding and decision of the court below is just, and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the subject matter and time of contribution, use of the purpose of contribution, violation of the rules of evidence, incomplete hearing, etc. as

Other grounds of appeal are with regard to the part of the court below's decision additionally, and are without merit.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed and the costs of appeal are assessed against the appellant. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Lee Yong-woo (Presiding Justice)