Suwon District Court 2009Guhap1724 (29 April 29, 2010)

early 208 Heavy241 ( December 22, 2009)

Property acquired by the right to claim the forced portion of inheritance is also included in the inherited property.

Since inheritance tax is subject to taxation of property of an ancestor, there is no ground to distinguish the amount equivalent to legal reserve of inheritance from the amount equivalent to legal reserve of inheritance inherited by the heir (ex officio revocation).

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

쇠鹬 쇠지鹬 3000 쇠지지지지 3000 지지지지지지지지지 3000

1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked, and all of the plaintiffs' lawsuits falling under the revoked part shall be dismissed.

2. Of the litigation costs in the first instance trial, 98% are assessed against the Plaintiffs, the remainder is assessed against the Defendant, and the appeal costs are assessed against the Defendant.

1. Purport of claim

Of the disposition of imposition of KRW 342,673,360 on February 1, 2008 against the Plaintiffs, the Defendant revoked the disposition of joint tax payment of KRW 155,239,633 of inheritance tax, etc. of KRW 342,673,360.

2. Purport of appeal

The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance shall be revoked, and all of the plaintiffs' claims corresponding to the revoked part shall be dismissed.

쇠지지지지 3000 지지지지지지 3000 지지지지지지지지지지 3000

1. Scope of adjudication;

The plaintiff against the defendant on February 25, 2009 KRW 342,673,360 (the inheritance tax that reverts to the defendant in 2005)

246,297,301 won and additional tax (39,703,049 won + additional tax of 56,673,010 won + additional tax of 56,673,010 won) were imposed (hereinafter “instant disposition”). On March 24, 2010, the Defendant filed a lawsuit seeking revocation of the disposition imposing the aggregate amount of inheritance tax of 155,239,63 won and additional tax of 246,297,307 won and additional tax of 96,376,059 won and additional tax of 96,376,000 won and additional tax of 246,376,000 won and additional tax of 157,000 won and additional tax of 56,000 won and additional tax of 157,000 won and 56,636,000 won and the remaining part of the appeal of 246,375,296,27.37, and 297.

2. Whether the part against the defendant among the lawsuit of this case is legitimate

According to the statements in Gap evidence No. 14-1 and No. 14-2 ex officio, the defendant is recognized as having revoked ex officio the disposition of imposition of the part against the defendant on November 8, 2010, in which the lawsuit is pending in the trial. The plaintiffs' lawsuit seeking the revocation of the part is unlawful as there is no benefit of lawsuit.

3. Conclusion

The part against the defendant in the judgment of the court of first instance is revoked, and the plaintiffs' lawsuit corresponding to the revocation part is revoked.

All shall be dismissed (Article 32 of the Administrative Litigation Act shall apply to the bearing of litigation costs).