Seoul Administrative Court-2016-Gu Partnership-9787 ( October 12, 2017)

As long as the forfeited stocks which were abandoned by the shareholder following the notice of allocation of forfeited stocks are selected by the non-party corporation, it is reasonable to view the forfeited stocks as allocation of forfeited stocks.

As long as a shareholder has selected the method of directly allocating forfeited stocks from the non-party corporation, it is inevitable to regard the allocation of forfeited stocks as stipulated in Article 39(1)1(a) of the Act. The difference between the market price of new stocks, which is profits acquired by those who received forfeited stocks by allocating forfeited stocks at a price lower than the market price and the price actually allocated shall be deemed as the value of donated property.

Article 39 of the former Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act

2017Nu50838 Revocation of Disposition of Imposition of Gift Tax

Park AA

Head of Seodaemun Tax Office

Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2016Guhap9787 decided May 12, 2017

September 15, 2017

September 29, 2017

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked. The defendant's gift tax (including additional tax) against the plaintiff on January 14, 2016 shall be revoked.

15,244,844 won shall be revoked.

1. Quotation of the reasons for the judgment of the first instance;

This judgment is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it is cited by Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.