Seoul Administrative Court 2017Guhap87432 (2018.09)

In the case of the acquisition of new shares with capital increase increase, even if the shareholder list is not kept and the acquisition of new shares is not stated, it falls under the requirements for deemed donation.

In the case of the acquisition of new shares with capital increase increase, even if the shareholder list is not kept and the acquisition of new shares is not stated, it falls under the requirements for deemed donation.

Donation of title trust property under Article 41-2 of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act

2018Nu60818 Revocation of Disposition of Imposition of Gift Tax

AA

The director of the tax office

December 11, 2018

on 15, 2019

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked. The defendant's gift tax on the June 2001 against the plaintiff on July 8, 2016 shall be revoked.

311,278,380 won (including additional duties) shall be revoked.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The court's explanation on this case is consistent with the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for dismissal or addition as follows. Thus, it shall accept it in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

○ Had the last 6th of the judgment of the first instance court shall be read as “D”.

According to the 13th judgment of the first instance court, the following contents are added to the following. (Although the Plaintiff established ○○ under the 45 million won in arrears with national taxes, etc., and the Plaintiff on January 18, 2000, the purpose of tax avoidance in the constructive gift of title trust is to limit to the taxes that may arise after the title trust. Therefore, it is unreasonable for ○○ to accelerate the purpose of tax avoidance on the grounds of the deceased’s above overdue national taxes, etc., and ○○ was merely allocated shares to the Plaintiff on the basis of the current status of shares and thus did not have the purpose of tax avoidance. However, the Plaintiff’s assertion that the purpose of tax avoidance in the constructive gift of title trust was to avoid the payment of taxes in arrears with the purpose of tax avoidance, and the Plaintiff’s death cannot be readily concluded as a result of the death of the deceased without the purpose of tax avoidance.

2. Conclusion

Therefore, the judgment of the first instance court is justifiable, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit.