The case holding that the constructive dividend under Article 26 (1) 1 of the Income Tax Act is applicable to the constructive dividend

If a corporation pays an amount equivalent to the par value of all the shares owned by one of its shareholders, and reduces its capital by way of the retirement of all the shares on that day, thereby refunding the invested capital of a specific shareholder to the funds of the corporation, and actually considering the whole process to appropriate the refunded funds to reduce the capital of the corporation, the corporation and the above shareholders are deemed to have transferred or acquired the shares for the purpose of reducing the capital by means of stock retirement, even if the above shares were transferred or reduced, even if the capital reduction was made before the resolution to reduce the capital by means of stock retirement, it does not differ from the capital reduction by the method of stock retirement. Therefore, the amount received by the above shareholders falls under the constructive dividend under Article 26 (1) 1 of the Income Tax

Article 26 of the Income Tax Act

East Industry Corporation

Head of Seodaemun Tax Office

The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The defendant's disposition of imposition of KRW 121,90,00 and the defense tax of KRW 22,180,000 against the plaintiff on June 2, 198 shall be revoked.

The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

1. 원고는 부동산임대업을 영위하는 주식회사로서 1985.12.23. 그 주주인 소외 김성윤으로부터 자기주식 450,000주(보통주)를 1주당 액면가액인 금 1,000원씩에 매수하여 같은 달 31. 그 대금 450,000,000원을 모두 지급하고 이를 취득하여 그날로 주주총회의 감자결의를 거처 위 취득주식 450,000주 전부를 소각하는 방법으로 자본을 감소(발행주식총수는 2,500,000주에서 2,050,000주오 변경되고, 자본의 총액은 2,500,000,000원에서 2,050,000,000원으로 감소)한 다음 1986.7.4. 그 등기까지 마친 사실, 이에 대하여 피고는 김성윤이 받은 위 금450,000,000원은 소득세법(이하 법이라고만 한다) 제26조 제1항 제1호 소정의 "주식의 소각 또는 자본의 감소로 인하여 주주가 받은 재산"으로서 의제배당에 해당함을 전제로 이를 지급한 원고는 법 제142조 제1항 제2호 에 따라 배당소득세의 원천징수의무가 있음에도 불구하고 이를 징수납부하지 아니하였다하여, 원고에게 1988.6.2., 김성윤이 위 주식 정부를 자산재평가적립금의 자본전입에 의하여 무상으로 취득하였다고 보고서 위 주식을 취득하기 위하여 소요된 금액은 "0"으로 계산, 과세표준을 금 450,000,000원으로하여 거기에 법 제144조 제1항 제2호 ㈕목 소정의 세율(25퍼센트)을 적용하여 산출한 금 112,500,000원에 법 제182조 제1항 소정의 원천징수납부불성실가산세(10퍼센트) 금 11,250,000원을 합한 금 123,750,000원의 배당소득세와 그 방위세금 27,000,000[이는 배당소득세 금 112,500,000원의 20퍼센트인 금 22,500,000원과 그 미납부가산세(20퍼센트) 금 4,500,000원을 합한 것이다]을 부과 고지하였다가, 1988.7.경 위 당초 처분이 원천징수의무자에게는 방위세의 미납부가산세를 부과할 수 없는데도 이를 부과한 잘못이 있다하여 방위세부분을 금 22,500,000원으로 감액결정하고, 이어 1989.3.20.에 이르러 김성윤이 위 주식 450,000주 중에서 6,400주는 금 6,400,000원에 유상취득하였음을 조사 확인하고 소득세법 제26조 제1항 소정의 "당해 주식을 취득하기 위하여 소요된 금액"을 계산하기 위하여 재무부예규 소득 22601-37(1985.1.10.자)이 정하고 있는 산식, 즉 [당해 주식을 취득하기 위하여 소요된 금액=재평가적립금의 자본전입에 따라 무상으로 취득한 주식을 제외한 주식의 취득가액/전체보유주식수 감자주식수]에 따라 위 주식 450,000주의 취득을 위하여 소요된 금액을 금 6,400,000원(6,400,000원/450,000주 450,000주=6,400,000)으로 보고 위 금 450,000,000원에서 이를 공제한 금 443,600,000원을 과세표준인 배당소득금액으로하여 다시 배당소득세를 금 110,900,000원 및 그 가산세 금 11,090,000원을 합한 금 121,990,000원으로, 방위세를 금 22,180,000원으로 감액결정함으로써 이 사건 과세처분에 이른 사실은 당사자 사이에 다툼이 없다.

2. As to the allegation that the taxation disposition of this case is lawful on the grounds of the above taxation grounds and relevant Acts and subordinate statutes, the plaintiff is entirely separate from the transfer of shares between the plaintiff and the capital reduction of the plaintiff company, and the transfer price of 450,000,000 won paid to the plaintiff Kim Sung-le is merely the transfer price of shares, and even in the capital reduction procedure conducted separately thereafter, the plaintiff's acquisition of shares is merely the simple retirement of the shares acquired by the plaintiff, and even though neither the above Kim Sung-le nor any shareholder did it actually receive property, the taxation disposition of this case made by the defendant on the assets received by the plaintiff's capital reduction or retirement of the plaintiff company with the transfer price of shares, and the provisions of Article 50 of the Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act on the appraisal of shares received due to capital reduction, etc. were unlawful in light of the above 450,000 shares and the standard for appraisal of the acquisition price of shares without compensation, it is against the principle of capital reduction of 10,000 won per share.

3. (1) 1 of Article 26 of the Income Tax Act provides that the value of the above-mentioned stocks shall not be calculated for the acquisition of the new stocks as stated in the provisions of subparagraph 2 of the same Article for the purpose of their acquisition, and that the new stocks shall not be calculated for the sake of the reduction of their capital, or that the value of the assets received by the shareholders, employees, or other investors shall be deemed to have been paid in excess of the amount required for their acquisition of the new stocks, as stated in the provisions of each subparagraph 1 of the Income Tax Act, because the above-mentioned provision for the acquisition of the new stocks shall not be included in the calculation of the value of the new stocks for the purpose of the 0th anniversary of their acquisition, and that the new stocks shall not be calculated for the purpose of the acquisition of the new stocks, as stated in the above-mentioned provision for the acquisition of the new stocks. This provision provides that the value of the new stocks shall not be calculated for the purpose of the acquisition of the new stocks for the purpose of the acquisition of the new stocks without compensation, and that the new stocks shall not be calculated for the acquisition of the new stocks.

Other opinions of the plaintiff cannot be accepted. Accordingly, in calculating the dividend income of this case, the value of the property acquired by the non-party by the retirement of this case pursuant to Article 26 (1) 1 of the Income Tax Act and the established rules of the Ministry of Finance and Economy shall be 450,000,000 won. The acquisition value of 450,000 shares without compensation shall be 6,400 shares acquisition value of 6,400 shares with compensation for the report, 6,400 shares, which was 6,400 shares acquisition value of 6,400 shares with compensation for 450,000 shares, was calculated as the amount required for the acquisition of 450,00 shares in this case. After all, in a case where the defendant reduced the capital by the method of the retirement of shares, it cannot be accepted by the so-called voluntary retirement that only the specific shares owned by the plaintiff were acquired by the non-party with the consent of the non-party, and even if the defendant purchased the total amount of capital reduction within 60 months in this case.

4. Thus, the defendant's taxation disposition of this case is legitimate. Accordingly, the plaintiff's claim of this case seeking its revocation is dismissed without merit, and the costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiff who lost it. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Judges Kim Jong-sung (Presiding Judge)