Since the concept of major shareholders is applied to non-listed corporations, 20% of the shares transferred by the major shareholders of the non-listed corporation shall be applied.

The concept of the lender is not applied only to listed corporations, but also to unlisted corporations, so the concept of the major shareholder is applied, so 20% of the shares transferred by the major shareholder of the unlisted corporation is applied.

Article 104 of the Income Tax Act

Seoul High Court 2018Nu62678 Revocation of Disposition Rejecting Transfer Income Tax Correction

AA et al. 5

00. Head of tax office

December 11, 2018

on 15, 2019

1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasoning for the judgment of the court in this case is as stated in the reasoning for the judgment of the court of first instance except for the following parts or any additional parts, and thus, this is cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

(a) 8 pages 2 of the judgment of the first instance to the last one (including each part) shall be written in the following manner:

(2) Article 157 (4) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 2692, Feb. 17, 2016; hereinafter the same shall apply) which has been enforced at the time of the disposition of the plaintiffs shall provide for the concept of major shareholders under each subparagraph of Article 94 (1) 3 of the former Income Tax Act as follows. (1) One stockholder or investor (including preemptive rights and securities depository receipts under paragraph (1); hereafter the same shall apply in this Chapter) of a corporation and one stock-listed corporation under Article 1-2 (1) and (3) 1 of the Enforcement Decree of the Framework Act on National Taxes (referring to the KONEX as of the date of acquisition of stocks, etc. and 2/100 or more of the total amount of stocks, etc. of the corporation listed on the KOSDAQ market as of the end of the immediately preceding business year belonging to the date of acquisition of stocks, etc. (hereafter referred to as "corporation listed on the KOSDAQ market under Article 2467 of the Enforcement Decree of the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act".

(b)one (10) of the judgment of the first instance court is 'one (10) one (10)', and the following shall be added:

[Plaintiffs asserted that the scope of 'major shareholders' without distinguishing a stock-listed corporation from a stock-listed corporation under Article 157 (4) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act is null and void because it goes beyond the delegation scope of superior laws and regulations. However, even if there exist grounds for delegation of "major shareholders prescribed by Presidential Decree" under Article 94 (1) 3 of the former Income Tax Act, as seen earlier, the provision of "major shareholders" (hereafter referred to as "major shareholders" in this Chapter) is added to the provision of "large shareholders" in the same chapter, so long as it is clearly stated that the concept of major shareholders will be used uniformly in the same chapter, it cannot be deemed that the former Income Tax Act delegates to the majority shareholders of a stock-listed corporation as alleged by the Plaintiffs

(c) 10 per cent of the judgment of the first instance court shall be 10 per cent of the "10 per cent".

2. Conclusion

If so, the judgment of the first instance court is justifiable, and the plaintiffs' appeal is dismissed as it is without merit.