Whether Article 9(2) of the former Inheritance Tax Act (amended by Act No. 4022 of Dec. 26, 1988), which provides that the value of inherited property shall be assessed on the basis of the value at the time of the imposition of the inheritance tax where the duty to report inheritance is fulfilled (affirmative)

B. Whether Article 5(2)1(a) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 13196 of Dec. 31, 190) becomes effective (affirmative)

Article 9(2) of the former Inheritance Tax Act (amended by Act No. 4022, Dec. 26, 1988) which provides for the assessment of the value of inherited property according to the value at the time of the commencement of inheritance where an inheritor has a duty to report under Article 20 of the Inheritance Tax Act, not at the time of the commencement of inheritance, where the inheritor has a duty to report under Article 20 of the same Act, shall not be deemed as a invalid provision contrary to the Framework Act on National Taxes, inasmuch as there is a provision for the assessment

B. Article 5 (2) 1 (a) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 13196 of Dec. 31, 190), which provides that the market price of inherited property is difficult to be calculated under Article 5 (2) 1 (a) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 13196 of Dec. 31, 190), land among tangible property, and a specific area determined by the Commissioner of the National Tax Service in the appraisal of buildings shall be the value assessed by the rate method in cases where it is difficult to calculate the market price at the time of commencement of inheritance or the imposition of inheritance tax, and it shall not be deemed that the provision in question goes against the provisions in Article 9

A.B. Article 9(1) and (2) of the former Inheritance Tax Act (amended by Act No. 4022, Dec. 26, 198); Articles 21 and 22(b) of the Framework Act on National Taxes; Articles 38 and 59 of the Constitution; Articles 5(1) and 5(2)1(a) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 13196, Dec. 31, 1990); Article 18(1) of the Framework Act on National Taxes

A. Supreme Court Decision 86Nu237 delivered on September 9, 1986 (Gong1986,141) 87Nu441 delivered on October 13, 1987 (Gong1987,1732) 90Nu6187 delivered on November 9, 1990 (Gong191,113) b. Supreme Court Decision 84Nu322 delivered on November 27, 1984 (Gong1985,88)

Plaintiff 1 and three others

Head of Pyeongtaek Tax Office

Seoul High Court Decision 90Gu10097 delivered on July 4, 1991

All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

Article 9(2) of the former Inheritance Tax Act (amended by Act No. 4022, Dec. 26, 1988) which provides for the assessment of the value of inherited property according to the value at the time of the commencement of inheritance where an inheritor has a duty to report under Article 20 of the Inheritance Tax Act (amended by Act No. 4022, Dec. 26, 1988) is not a provision for the assessment of the value of inherited property in a case where an inheritor has a duty to report under Article 20 of the same Act, and as such, it is for the reasonable assessment of the value of inherited property without a report or omitted in the report, it cannot

In addition, the term "value based on the current status at the time of commencement of inheritance or at the time of imposition of inheritance tax" under Article 9 means, in principle, the exchange value at the time of commencement of inheritance or at the time of imposition of inheritance tax. However, the concept includes the value assessed in an objective and reasonable manner in lieu of the market price if it is difficult to calculate the market price. Thus, the value based on the current status at the time of commencement of inheritance or the value at the time of imposition of inheritance tax under Article 5 (1) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 13196 of Dec. 31, 190) shall be determined according to paragraphs (2) 1 (a) through (5) if it is difficult to calculate the market price at the time of commencement of inheritance or at the time of imposition of inheritance tax, and the value at the time of imposition of inheritance tax shall not be deemed as being calculated based on the ratio of the market price at the time of commencement of inheritance or a specific area prescribed by the Commissioner of the National Tax Service in the evaluation of a building.

Therefore, in the same purport, the judgment of the court below that the tax disposition in this case was lawful pursuant to Article 9 of the Inheritance Tax Act and Article 5 (1) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act is just, and there is no error of law as pointed out in the theory of lawsuit. The arguments are groundless.

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Park Jong-ho (Presiding Justice)