logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주고등법원 1995. 05. 18. 선고 94구4171 판결
농지상속공제는 생전증여가액을 포함한 상속세과세가액에서 위 물적공제종합한도까지 할 수 있는 것인지 당부[국패]
Title

Whether a farmland inheritance deduction can be made from the taxable amount of inheritance taxes, including the amount of pre-sale donation, to the above comprehensive limit of physical deduction.

Summary

Under the principle of no taxation without law, Article 11(3) of the Inheritance Tax Act cannot be deemed to apply mutatis mutandis to a farmland inheritance deduction. Article 11-3(3) of the Inheritance Tax Act is clear in the text of the law that, in case where the value of farmland is included in the pre-sale donation amount, the farmland inheritance deduction itself is excluded, and that the amount of farmland inheritance deduction is not limited to the balance after deducting the pre-sale donation amount from the taxable amount of inheritance tax, so a farmland inheritance deduction can be made from the taxable amount of inheritance tax, including the pre-sale donation amount, up to the comprehensive limit of physical deduction stipulated in Article

The decision

The contents of the decision shall be the same as attached.

Text

The disposition of imposition of KRW 9,341,410 against the plaintiff on January 16, 1995 by the defendant shall be revoked. Litigation costs shall be borne by the defendant.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

원고의 어머니인 소외 이ㅇ자가 1992. 11. 9. 사망함에 따라 원고가 ㅇㅇ시 ㅇㅇ동 ㅇㅇㅇ의 9 답 2764㎡ 및 같은 동 ㅇㅇㅇ의 8 답 661㎡를 상속받은 사실, 피고는 그 상속재산가액을 150,531,200원으로 평가하여 여기에 위 이ㅇ자가 상속개시일 전 3년 이내에 그 상속인인 소외 정ㅇ선에게 증여한 ㅇㅇ시 ㅇㅇ동 ㅇㅇㅇ의 2 대 281㎡의 재산가액 금141,624,000원을 가산한 금292,155,200원에서 장례비 2,000,000원을 공제한 290,155,200원을 상속세과세가액으로 정한 후 기초공제 60,000,000원, 인적공제 148,531,200원, 농지상속세공제 2,000,000원을 공제한 금79,624,000원을 상속세과세표준으로 하여 1993. 11. 20. 청구인에게 상속세 15,851,580원을 결정 고지하였다가 이 소송 계속중인 1995. 1. 16. 이를 취소하고 상속인별로 경정하여 원고에게 상속세 9,341,410원, 소외 정ㅇ선에게 상속세 6,510,160원으로 하여 부과고지(이하 이 사건 처분이라고 한다)한 사실은 을제3호증의 1,2,3, 을제9호증의 각 기재와 변론의 전취지를 종합하면 이를 인정할 수 있다.

2. The plaintiff's assertion

In this case, in accordance with the provisions of Articles 11-3(1) and 11-5 of the Inheritance Tax Act, the limit of the amount of deduction for farmland inheritance to be deducted from the taxable amount of inheritance tax in order to calculate the taxable amount of inheritance tax shall be KRW 100,00,000 according to the provisions of Articles 11-3(1) and 11-5 of the Inheritance Tax Act, however, if the defendant deducts the amount of deduction for farmland inheritance from the amount of inheritance to the aggregate limit of the above physical deduction, the defendant already deducted the amount of deduction from the amount of inherited property, which resulted in an unreasonable result in deducting the amount of deduction from the amount of inherited property, which is not the value of inherited property, and therefore, the amount of KRW 2,00,000 calculated by deducting the amount of deduction from 150,531,200 from the amount

3. Determination

A. The issue of this case is whether the inherited property is farmland and the subject of donation within 3 years prior to the commencement of inheritance is not farmland and added to the taxable amount of inheritance taxes, the amount of farmland inheritance deduction is limited to the value after personal deduction from the value of inherited property or can be deducted from the taxable amount of inheritance taxes up to the limit of physical deduction from the taxable amount of inheritance taxes.

(b) Related statutes;

In case where an ancestor falls under the provisions of Article 4 (1) through 2 (1) of the Inheritance Tax Act (limited to the Act before it was amended by Act No. 4662 of Dec. 31, 1993; hereinafter the same shall apply), the inheritance tax shall be levied on the aggregate of the value of the inherited property to be levied and the value of the property donated by the ancestor to a person other than his heir within five years before the commencement of the inheritance tax, minus the amount under any of the following subparagraphs from the value of the property donated by the ancestor to his heir within three years before the commencement of the inheritance tax, and the taxable value of the inherited property shall be calculated by deducting the value of the property donated by the ancestor to his heir within one year after the commencement of the inheritance tax; and

C. Determination

(1) Comprehensively taking account of the above relevant provisions, the inheritance tax base is the remaining amount after calculating the taxable amount of inheritance taxes, which is the basic deduction, personal deduction, physical deduction, and forest inheritance deduction. As such, the Inheritance Tax Act only provides for the deduction of farmland inheritance only within the limit of the total amount of physical deduction in cases where the inherited property is farmland, and does not have any such restrictive provision as that of the personal deduction for the donated property added to the value of inherited property (Article 11(3) of the Act cannot be applied by analogy in cases of farmland inheritance, and since this case is a farmland, Article 11-3(3) of the Act, which applies to cases where the donated property added to inherited property is farmland, does not require a farmland inheritance deduction within the limit of the taxable amount of inheritance taxes, but it shall be deemed that the basic deduction, personal deduction, and the remaining amount may be deducted up to the total limit of physical deduction among the remaining amounts.

(2) Accordingly, in calculating the inheritance tax base, it is clear that there exists no remaining amount when deducting the basic deduction of KRW 60,000 from the taxable amount of inheritance tax of KRW 290,155,200, the basic deduction of KRW 148,531,200, the personal deduction of KRW 148,531,200, and the farmland inheritance deduction of KRW 100,000,000 in sequential order. Thus, the Defendant’s instant disposition in this case is erroneous in the calculation of the farmland inheritance deduction and

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified and the costs of lawsuit are assessed against the losing defendant. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow