logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2017.09.15 2016누52431
증여세부과처분취소
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

Reasons

1. This part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is identical to the part on two to three pages 5, among the reasons for the judgment, and thus, this part of the judgment is cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff did not acquire the instant shares under the instant contract, but acquired the right to distribute profits at a certain ratio as a consideration for business activities D and E. Thus, the instant disposition based on the premise that the instant shares were donated should be revoked as it is unlawful.

B) Even if the instant shares were acquired, it cannot be deemed as a donation since it was not paid without compensation as remuneration for business activities, and since the Plaintiff cannot set up a reasonable price, the remainder after excluding a reasonable price cannot be deemed as a donation. C) Since the instant shares were issued by unlisted companies located in China, they cannot be assessed by applying a supplementary evaluation method under the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act, it constitutes an unlawful method of calculating the instant shares.

2) In light of the language and text of the instant contract, the Plaintiff acquired the instant shares from B without compensation. Thus, the instant disposition is lawful.

B) Even if the instant shares were paid as compensation for damages for nonperformance of profit distribution under a joint venture agreement, since the parties to a joint venture agreement are F, the Plaintiff is not the Plaintiff, and thus, the Plaintiff is donated the instant shares, even if the instant shares were paid as remuneration for business activities, such remuneration is limited to the portion of the instant shares’ dividends, and thus, the instant shares themselves shall be deemed donated, and at least the portion exceeding the reasonable price to be paid by the Plaintiff shall be deemed as donation.

B. The reasons for this part of the judgment of the court of first instance are three pages.

arrow