Incheon District Court-2015-Gu Group-50174 (Law No. 18, 2017)

Cho-2015-China-1267 ( October 29, 2015)

Appropriateness of the disposition of imposing gift tax by applying Article 45-2 of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act to the claimant;

Since the Plaintiff is the title truster of the instant shares as aaa Shipping, and the Defendant added the same content as a preliminary disposition through a preparatory document, the disposition based on the premise that the title truster is a Aa Shipping is lawful. However, the instant disposition that applied the premium rate of 30% as the largest shareholder’s shares is unlawful.

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

Seoul High Court 2017Nu63964 Disposition Revocation of Imposition of Gift Tax

○ ○

○○ Head of tax office

December 12, 2017

2018.01.09

1. All appeals filed by the plaintiff and the defendant are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by each party.

1. Purport of claim

The Defendant’s disposition of imposition of KRW 26,763,780, which was imposed on the Plaintiff on December 11, 2014, shall be revoked.

2. Purport of appeal

[2] The part against the Plaintiff in the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked. The part of the disposition imposing gift tax of KRW 26,763,780, which was imposed on the Plaintiff on December 111, 2014, which was imposed by the Defendant, shall be revoked.

[Defendant] The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance is revoked, and the plaintiff's claim corresponding to the revocation part is dismissed.

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, and thus, this is cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

○ It is difficult to conduct the last three of the judgment of the first instance court. The following shall be added:

[The Defendant asserted that the actual owner of the instant shares is the deceased and presented evidence Nos. 19-24 (including paper numbers) as evidence to support it in the trial additionally at the trial. However, in accordance with the above evidence, it is difficult to recognize that the actual owner of the instant shares is the deceased merely because the deceased exercised personnel rights on ○○ Group affiliate companies, including ○○ Shipping, and ordered work.]

○ The following shall be added to 5th written judgment of the first instance court:

(3) As to the shares of this case, the Plaintiff asserted to the effect that the purpose of tax avoidance is not to recognize the transfer margin, even if ○○○ Shipping sold its shares under its real name after conversion of its own shares. However, in light of the title trust status and changes in the shares of the shares of this case, it cannot be readily concluded that there was no tax avoidance purpose in relation to the shares of this case, in light of the entries in subparagraphs 2 and 10 as well as

2. Conclusion

If so, the judgment of the first instance court is justifiable, and the appeal by the plaintiff and the defendant is dismissed as it is without merit.