A. The requirements for wrongful calculation and the standard for its determination

(b) Standard time of market price under Article 170(8) of the Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act in denying wrongful calculation and calculating income amount; and

A. Evaluation of wrongful acts under Article 55 of the Income Tax Act is a transaction between related parties under each subparagraph of Article 111(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, and objectively reduces tax burden under each subparagraph of paragraph (2) of the same Article, if it is sufficient that the act or calculation is made between related parties under each subparagraph of paragraph (1) of the same Article, and it does not require any tax avoidance purpose or economic loss to the parties. In a case where it is deemed that a certain transaction between related parties cannot be deemed a normal transaction to be done by a reasonable economic person in light of social norms and customs, and where it is deemed that the government has reduced tax burden unfairly,

B. In calculating the income amount recognized as a wrongful calculation, Article 170(8) of the Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act provides that the acquisition value or transfer value shall be calculated on the basis of the market price and does not provide for the standard time of the market price. Therefore, in the case of real estate transfer, it is reasonable to view the transfer time as the registration date pursuant to Article 27 of the Income Tax Act and Article 53(1)1 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 12564, Dec. 31, 198)

(a) Article 55 of the Income Tax Act;

Plaintiff 1 and one other, Plaintiffs et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellee

The head of Seodaemun-gu Tax Office

Seoul High Court Decision 85Gu1263 delivered on April 1, 1988

All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

As to the grounds of appeal by the Plaintiff (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed)

According to the decision of the court below, when the plaintiffs convert school affairs of the island publishing company, which is a private company in their own form, into a corporate form, most of the existing corporation's shares are purchased, changed its trade name to school affairs of the corporation. On December 22, 1983, the transfer price of all rights and duties, assets, and debts between the school affairs of the corporation and the school affairs of the individual corporation as of January 1, 1984 shall be the value obtained by deducting total debts from total assets on the basis of the settlement of accounts prepared as of December 31, 1983. Building and machinery were to be the appraisal price of the above 472,605,00,000 as of December 26, 1983; the non-party, as of December 26, 1983, on the premise that the above appraisal price was 196,000 won, 1,634,787,500 won as of December 16, 2016.

2. The judgment of the court below that the plaintiffs' act of transferring the above land and buildings to school affairs of the corporation cannot be viewed as an investment in kind is just and the dissenting opinion cannot be adopted to criticize the judgment below.

Whether the act or calculation constitutes a wrongful calculation under Article 55 of the Income Tax Act is a transaction between specially related persons under each subparagraph of Article 111(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, and if it is objectively recognized that the tax burden under each subparagraph of paragraph (2) of the same Article has been reduced unfairly, it shall not be deemed that the parties have the purpose of tax avoidance or economic loss. In such a case, when the purport of the Act on the Calculation of Wrongful Acts and subordinate statutes is deemed to be a normal transaction between specially related persons in light of social norms and customs, and it is deemed that the tax burden has been reduced unfairly because it cannot be deemed a reasonable transaction to be done by a reasonable economic person in light of social norms and customs, it shall be denied and the government has

In light of this, the court below's decision that the transfer of the real estate constitutes wrongful calculation based on the market price appraisal on June 14, 1984, which was far more than the date the defendant settled the price in the contract for the transfer of the real estate of this case. The court below pointed out that the court below erred in its determination that the transfer of the real estate of this case constitutes wrongful calculation despite the absence of assertion or proof that there was no price fluctuation from the defendant. However, even in the case of the land, the court below's decision that the transfer price of 472,605,00 won is less than the current market price standard amount of 56,875,825 won on January 1, 1984 near the date of the transfer contract where the transfer was appearing in the record, and that the current market price is considerably lower than the normal market price, is subject to unfair calculation. Since Article 12 (3) of the Industrial Complex Management Act, Article 12 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, which cited in the lawsuit, there is no problem of unfairly regulating the above law to apply the disposal price of factories.

In addition, in calculating the income amount recognized as wrongful calculation, Article 170 (8) of the Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act provides that the acquisition value or transfer value shall be calculated based on the market price, and there is no special provision regarding the market price base time. Thus, the judgment of the court below that deemed the cause of registration as the time of transfer pursuant to Article 27 of the Income Tax Act, Article 53 (1) 1 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 12564 of Dec. 31, 198), and Article 53 (1) of the same Act

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

Justices Yoon Young-young (Presiding Justice)