Seoul Administrative Court 201Guhap2880 (No. 23, 2011)

Seocho 2010west 1426 ( November 02, 2010)

The transaction value between related parties shall not be deemed the market value.

The value of the transaction between related parties shall not be deemed the market price, and the disposition imposed by supplementary method of assessment is legitimate on the grounds that there are no data to know the value of the stocks deemed ordinarily established in the transaction which is freely conducted between many and unspecified persons within a certain period before

2011Nu34605 Revocation of Disposition of Imposition of Gift Tax

IsaA

The Director of the Pacific District Office

Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2011Guhap2880 decided September 23, 2011

March 29, 2012

May 3, 2012

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The judgment of the first instance court is revoked. The defendant revoked the disposition imposing gift tax of KRW 000 on the plaintiff on December 14, 2009 (According to the complaint submitted by the plaintiff and the evidence No. 2-1.2 of the evidence No. 2, etc., the plaintiff appears to have mistakenly stated the date of the above disposition in the complaint's claim as of December 14, 2009 as of December 7, 2009).

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is reasonable, and thus, it is cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. In the appellate court, the plaintiff, around December 31, 2003, when the plaintiff and KimB, etc., who were the representative director of theCC company, purchased theCC company's shares from KimD when acquiring the shares from KimD, evaluated and purchased at least 00 won per share assessed at a higher level than the genuine stock value in consideration of the degree of contribution to the KimD company. On July 6, 2004, the plaintiff assessed at the time of acquiring the shares of theCC company from KimD, etc., 00 won per share assessed at the market price which properly reflects the objective exchange value of the shares of this case, but the defendant's disposition of this case on a different premise was unlawful.

3. However, according to Articles 60 and 63 of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act and Article 49(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act (hereinafter “Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act”) which the Plaintiff had entered into force at the time of the transfer of the instant shares from KimB, etc., the value of the property on which the gift tax is levied is based on the market price as of the date of donation. In cases where the current market price cannot be calculated by using supplementary evaluation methods, such as Article 63 of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act, if the transaction price is deemed to be the market price, and the transaction price shall be deemed to be the market price, but the transaction price shall be excluded from cases where the transaction price is deemed to be objectively unfair, such as the transaction price with a person with a special relationship under Article 26(4) of the Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act, even if the transaction price of non-listed shares was made within a certain period before and after the date of the transfer of the shares.

1841. According to the above facts cited by the plaintiff's 1 and 60. The plaintiff's 60. The plaintiff's 60. The plaintiff's 1-2-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-6-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-7-

4. If so, the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit.