The obligation of the inheritee to be deducted from the value of the inherited property and the burden of proof therefor.

At the time of commencement of inheritance, the primary debtor had the ability to repay the loan, and since the primary debtor has no means to repay, it cannot be deemed that the obligation to guarantee the principal and interest of the loan was either a debt that the inheritor has to pay, or that he could exercise the right to indemnity against the primary debtor.

Article 45-2 of the Framework Act on National Taxes

Public imposts, etc. deducted from the value of inherited property under Article 14 of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act.

1. The part of the plaintiffs' claim for revision of inheritance tax among the lawsuits of this case is dismissed.

2. The plaintiffs' remaining claims are dismissed.

3. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Cheong-gu Office

With respect to the disposition of imposition of inheritance tax of KRW 717,244,540 (the original tax amount was KRW 745,38,700, but the defendant was reduced or corrected according to the decision of the National Tax Tribunal on March 8, 2006) against the plaintiffs on August 5, 1999, the defendant revoked the disposition of refusal to request inheritance tax correction against the plaintiffs on October 20, 204.

717,244,547 won, corrected by the defendant against the plaintiffs on March 8, 2006, shall be corrected to 626,278,608 won.

1. Details of the disposition;

The following facts do not conflict between the parties, or if Gap evidence 1-1, 2, 3, 2-1, 3-2, 3-1, 3-2, 3-1, 4-1, 2, 5-2, 1, 3 through 6, and 10-1, 5-2, 1, 1, 3 through 6, and 10-10, and the purport of the whole pleadings as a result of this court's financial transaction information inquiry conducted by the head of the Credit Management Center of Korea, Inc., Ltd., Ltd., for the fact inquiry, are collected, and there is no

A. The ○○○ Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “○○○”) was established on July 27, 1991 and operated the manufacturing and sales business of non-metallic metals, etc., and closed on September 30, 200, and the Plaintiff ○○ operated it as the ○○ representative director.

B. On November 22, 1994, 180,000 won of other facility fund 1.8 billion won (hereinafter referred to as "first loan"), interest rate per annum, 7% per annum, 17% per annum, and 16 November 16, 2002 at the due date, from ○○ Bank (hereinafter referred to as "○○ Bank") (the trade name was '○○ Bank', but it was changed to the present trade name after '○○ Bank'). On February 28, 1996, the ○○○○○○ and ○○○○○○○○○○○○ Bank were loaned with a loan of KRW 100 million per annum, interest rate per annum, 7% per annum, 18% per annum, and on February 27, 2004, respectively, the principal and interest of the ○○○○ Bank and its father at that time were set as ○○○○ Bank's joint and several debt.

C. Meanwhile, the ○○○ died on September 13, 1997. Accordingly, the Plaintiffs jointly succeeded to the property of ○○○ as his wife or children according to the ratio of statutory inheritance. ○○ up to that time, the Plaintiffs paid the interest of KRW 90,107,072 out of the principal of the first loan and the total principal amount up to that time, and the interest of KRW 40,222,072 out of the principal of the second loan and the interest of KRW 149,670,545 (the principal of the first loan - KRW 180,00,000 -90,107,072) and (the principal of the second loan - KRW 100,000,000 - KRW 40,2222,383), hereinafter referred to as “the balance of the loan 1,245”).

D. On March 12, 1998, the plaintiffs calculated the taxable amount of inheritance taxes of 2,617,434,832 won, the tax base of 1,602,794,832 won, the tax base of 432,317,139 won, and the tax amount of 432,317,139 won. In calculating the taxable amount of inheritance taxes, the plaintiffs reported the tax base and its tax amount to the defendant. In calculating the taxable amount of inheritance taxes, the amount of joint and several liability for 1,2 loan balance 149,670,545 won to the ○○ bank of ○○○○ in the taxable amount of inheritance taxes was not deducted

E. On August 5, 1999, the defendant revealed that the taxable amount of inheritance taxes of the plaintiffs following Lee○' death was KRW 3,394,51,751, different from the plaintiffs' contents of the report. Based on this, the defendant calculated the inheritance tax base and the amount of the inheritance tax as KRW 2,374,51,51, and KRW 745,38,700, and then notified the plaintiffs of this determination to impose KRW 745,38,700 of the inheritance tax (hereinafter referred to as "the initial imposition disposition"). At that time, the first imposition disposition was made against the plaintiffs. The first imposition disposition became final and conclusive as it was not dissatisfied with the plaintiffs.

F. Meanwhile, around 2001, ○○ Bank filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiffs on the ground that the Plaintiffs succeeded to the joint and several surety obligation of KRW 1,220,670,545 with respect to ○○○○ Bank, and accordingly, filed an appeal against the Plaintiffs on August 18, 2003, “○○ Bank,” the amount of KRW 29,934,108, and its delay damages, and the Plaintiff○○○○○○○, and this amount of KRW 19,956,071, and its delay damages, each of the 149,670,545 won and its delay damages, and the ○○○○○○○○○○○○ 2,000 won and its delay damages were paid to the ○○○○○○○○○○○ 2,000, 201, 301, 470, 201, 204, and 304, hereinafter referred to as the Plaintiff○○○○○ 9.

G. On October 11, 2004, the plaintiffs cannot exercise their right to indemnity against the plaintiff's share of ○○○○ Bank's first, second, second and second loans's debt amounting to KRW 149,670,545 on the ground that the new principal debtor of ○○○○ Bank's debt amounting to KRW 149,670,545 at the time of commencement of the inheritance (the time of death of ○○○○○○○○) by a related civil judgment on October 11, 2004, and it is confirmed that the plaintiffs' joint and several debt amounting to KRW 149,670,545 on ○○○○○ Bank's debt amount or their heir's debt amount due to the plaintiffs' joint and several debt amount due to the lack of financial resources at the time of the commencement of the inheritance. In addition, when the plaintiff ○○○, a separate joint and several surety, the plaintiff's other joint and several debt amounting to ○○○○○○ Bank's debt amounting to 157.

H. On October 20, 2004, the Defendant rendered a corrective refusal to accept the Plaintiffs’ request for correction against the Plaintiffs on the ground that ○○○○○ Bank’s joint and several liability for KRW 1,2 loans to KRW 149,670,545 against ○○○○ Bank was able to exercise the right of reimbursement when the Plaintiffs, who are ○○○ or her heir, were able to perform the above joint and several liability (hereinafter “instant corrective refusal disposition”).

I. However, on March 8, 2006, the defendant recognized the portion of the first, second loans 109,750,7771 which the plaintiffs paid to ○○○○○ upon the decision of the National Tax Tribunal based on the plaintiffs' claim, as the inheritance obligation, the remaining amount of KRW 54,875,385,386 which the plaintiffs paid to ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ by deducting it from the taxable amount of inheritance taxes, and calculated the taxable amount of inheritance taxes as KRW 3,339,643,366 on the basis that the plaintiff’s inheritance tax base and tax amount were calculated as KRW 2,319,643,66 and KRW 717,24,547 which were paid by ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○, the original amount of inheritance taxes imposed as KRW 745,380,700,747.7.

(j) On December 196, 1996, ○○○○ had owned active property equivalent to KRW 5,467,147,147,155, including 1,813,542,09, 3,044, 382,69, and 609,222,449, and 3,04,382, and697, and investment and other assets. On the other hand, ○○ was in a situation where the total amount of active property exceeds KRW 4,95,809,662, including 1,2, and 4,95,809, and 62, including 4,337,493 (see the summary balance sheet of evidence No. 4).

2. Whether the lawsuit of this case is legitimate with respect to the portion of request for inheritance tax correction;

A. At the time of the commencement of the inheritance, the plaintiffs filed a claim with the purport that the amount of the inheritance tax in this case should be corrected from KRW 717,24,547 to KRW 626,278,608 on the ground that the amount of the inheritance tax in this case is KRW 233,061,924 on the principal and interest of the balance of the first and second loans to ○○○○○○○ Bank, which became final and conclusive at the time of the commencement of the inheritance (the time of the death of ○○○○○○) and the amount of the joint and several liability is deducted from the taxable amount of inheritance tax due to the death of ○○○○○○○○.

B. Where, prior to the judgment on the merits, a disposition of taxation, such as inheritance, becomes final and conclusive on the legality of the lawsuit concerning the portion of the claim for rectification of inheritance tax, a request for rectification as to the tax disposition, which was final and conclusive by the competent tax office pursuant to Article 45-2 of the Framework Act on National Taxes concerning the claim for rectification, unless there are grounds for invalidation. In a case where the competent tax office has rendered a disposition of rejection as to the claim for rectification, it is possible to file a lawsuit seeking revocation of the disposition of rejection, and it is not possible to file a lawsuit seeking revocation or a lawsuit seeking reduction or correction of the amount of tax with the court without undergoing the procedure for filing a request for correction as to the final and conclusive tax disposition.

C. However, according to the facts acknowledged above, the disposition of this case becomes final and conclusive as it is because the plaintiffs are not dissatisfied. Thus, the plaintiffs' claim for correction against the final and conclusive disposition of this case shall be filed with the competent tax office in accordance with the provisions of Article 45-2 of the Framework Act on National Taxes, and the competent tax office shall file a lawsuit seeking revocation of the disposition of this case, which is final and conclusive with the court, or seeking reduction or correction of the amount of tax directly with the court, cannot be filed. Thus, the plaintiffs' claim as to the part of the claim for correction of inheritance tax is unlawful.

3. Whether the disposition rejecting the correction of this case is legitimate

A. The parties' assertion

The defendant asserts that the rejection disposition of correction of this case is a legitimate disposition under the relevant laws and regulations. The plaintiffs asserted that "the new principal debtor of loans Nos. 1, 2, and 1, 149,670,545 with respect to ○○○○ Bank is not sufficient to pay the principal and interest of ○○○ Bank at the time of commencement of the inheritance (the time of death of ○○○○○○○○○) by the relevant public-private partnership judgment, and therefore, it is confirmed that ○○○○'s joint and several liability obligations are obligations to be repaid by ○○○○○○ or its heir, and the plaintiffs cannot exercise their right to indemnity against ○○○○○○○○○, and the correction disposition can not be accepted after deducting the amount of the principal and interest of ○○○○○ Bank from the inheritance tax base and the inheritance tax amount of ○○○○○, which are other joint and several liability joint and several liability, regardless of the lack of financial resources at the time of commencement of the inheritance."

B. Relevant statutes

It is as shown in the attached Form.

C. Determination

(i)the obligation of the inheritee to be deducted from the value of the inherited property and the burden of proof for it;

The value of inherited property refers to an obligation of which it is deemed certain that an ancestor has to pay with a final and conclusive obligation by an ancestor at the time of commencement of the inheritance. Thus, in cases where an ancestor bears a joint and several liability for a third party or is liable for a surety's property at the time of commencement of the inheritance, if it is deemed that the principal obligor is not in an insolvent condition, and thus there is no possibility that the obligor may collect a claim for reimbursement against the principal obligor, the amount of such obligation may be deducted from the value of inherited property. In such cases, if the principal obligor is not in an insolvent condition at the time of the commencement of the inheritance, it is generally possible to receive a loan differently as the principal obligor continues to pay for a considerable period of time due to the commencement of the procedure such as bankruptcy, composition, corporate reorganization, or compulsory execution of a sentence, and there is no possibility that the obligor may not receive a loan, and on the other hand, the reason is objectively determined to have an effect on the taxable value of inherited property, and thus, it is reasonable to view that there is a special reason for 904.204.84.

(2) However, according to the facts established prior to the above disposition, ○○○○○○ was the primary debtor of a loan No. 1 and 2, who had operated its business normally for three years after the death of ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○, as well as fixed assets of KRW 1,813,542,09, which was the end of the year immediately preceding the death of ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ KRW 609,222,49, total amount of investment and other assets of KRW 5,467,147,155, including the first, second, second, 809,62, and the total amount of assets of KRW 511,37,493 or more, and there was no reason to acknowledge the Plaintiffs’ right to reimbursement at the time of ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○’s death.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the part of the plaintiffs' claim for correction of inheritance tax among the lawsuits of this case is unlawful and dismissed, and the remaining claims are dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

public official law, order of law,

Basic Act

Article 45-2 (Request for Rectification, etc.)

(2) Any person who has filed the tax base return within the legal return term, or who has the tax base and amount of the national tax decided upon, may request the decision or rectification within two months from the date of knowing that the cause has occurred, regardless of the period as referred to in paragraph (1) above, in the following cases:

1. Where any transaction, act, etc. which is the basis of calculation of the tax base and amount of tax in the initial return, determination or correction becomes final and conclusive as different by a final judgment (including any reconciliation or other act having the same effect as the judgment) in the lawsuit against it;

(3) The head of tax office shall, upon receiving a request for the decision or rectification under paragraphs (1) and (2), decide or rectify the tax base and amount, or notify the person making the request of the fact that there is no reason to make any decision or rectification, within two months after he receives such request

former Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act (amended by Act No. 7580 of July 13, 2005)

Article 14 (Public Imposts, etc. Deducted from Value of Inherited Property)

(1) Where inheritance commences due to the death of a resident, the value or expenses falling under any of the following subparagraphs related to the inherited property shall be subtracted from the value of the inherited property:

3. Obligations (excluding donations made by an ancestor to his/her heir within ten years before the commencement date of inheritance, and donations made by an ancestor to a person who is not his/her heir within five years before the commencement date of inheritance; hereafter the same shall apply in this Article);

Enforcement Decree of the former Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 18989 of August 5, 2005)

Article 10 (Method, etc. of Verifying Obligations)

(1) The term “those proved by the method prescribed by the Presidential Decree” in Article 14 (4) of the Act means those proved by one of the following subparagraphs, as debts of the inheritee at the time of the commencement of inheritance:

1. Documents confirming that debts owed to the State, local governments and financial institutions are debts owed to such institutions;

2. Debt obligations owed to any person other than those under subparagraph 1, shall be verified by a contract for debt-bearing, a creditor's certificate, documents evidencing the establishment of security and the payment of interest, etc.