Seoul Administrative Court 2016Guhap65428 ( October 23, 2017)

Seocho 2016west0102 (2016.03.09)

Property managed and trusted by a clan similar organization is included in the inherited property, and the amount paid with shares is subject to gift tax.

Since it is reasonable to deem that the instant trust is a management trust to obtain part of the land rent proceeds of this case and to entrust management to the above organization, the disposal proceeds are included in inherited property, and the amount received separately as the shares of the plaintiffs are subject to separate gift tax.

Article 9 (Trusts Deemed Inherited Property)

Article 33 (Donation of Trust Benefits)

2017Nu4307

○○○ 1

○ Head of tax office

Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2016Guhap65428 decided March 23, 2017

July 14, 2017

August 25, 2017

1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked. The gift tax in the attached Form as stated by the defendant against the plaintiffs on September 15, 2015 shall be revoked by the defendant.

(including additional tax) fully revoke the disposition of imposition.

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

The reasoning of this judgment is as follows, except for dismissal, addition, or deletion of the following contents among the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it is citing it as it is in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

○ 4.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 ............................ ...........

○ 7 pages 1, “Plaintiffs” means “Plaintiffs”.

○ 7 side 7 side 7 side 7 side her "Plaintiff" shall be considered as "Plaintiffs".

○ 13 2 pages 13 add the following parts:

“(On the other hand, the plaintiffs asserted to the effect that if the instant trust is merely a management trust, the instant disposition becomes null and void due to the taxation disposition on the facts that did not arise from the beginning of the year, but it is difficult to conclude that the instant expropriation is null and void due to the fact that the instant trust is a management trust, and it is difficult to conclude that the instant expropriation is null and void.”

○ 13. 3. to 14. 19.

○ 15, 14, 16, and 7, as follows:

Article 9(1) of the former Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act provides that “In principle, the property trusted by the deceased shall be deemed inherited property, and if another person owns the right to benefit from the trust, only the value equivalent to such benefit shall be excluded from the inheritance tax base.” This interpretation of the above provision makes it difficult to see that there is a conflict of opinion due to intention. ② Park ○○ filed a return on the death of the deceased ○○○ upon inheritance without knowing that the land (the size equivalent to the shares of the deceased ○○○) was included in the inherited property on February 29, 2012, on the ground that it is difficult to view that the Plaintiffs were liable to report and pay gift tax to the Defendant on the following grounds: (a) it is difficult to view that the Plaintiffs did not know that the land was included in the inherited property on the ground that the Plaintiff did not report and paid gift tax on the inheritance property on March 29, 2006 because it is difficult for the Plaintiffs to view that the land was not included in the inherited property.

2. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiffs' claim of this case is dismissed in its entirety due to the lack of reason, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the plaintiffs' appeal is dismissed in its entirety due to the lack of reason, and it is so decided as per Disposition.