In a case where the transfer registration of ownership made on the ground of donation is null and void, and thus the form of cancellation of the donation contract is made through the restoration to its original state, whether the said transfer registration fee constitutes a deemed donation under Article 39-2 of the Inheritance Tax Act (negative)

If the transfer registration of ownership made on the ground of donation is null and void, it shall not be deemed that the property was acquired by the donation of another person provided for in Article 29-2 of the Inheritance Tax Act, on the basis of the rent for transfer registration of ownership, even if it was made later in the form of cancellation of the donation contract through the restoration to the original state

Article 29-2 of the Inheritance Tax Act

Plaintiff

Head of Namyang District Tax Office

Seoul High Court Decision 87Gu121 delivered on July 27, 1987

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The grounds of appeal by the defendant litigant are examined.

According to the court below's determination, the plaintiff and the non-party 2, 3, and 4 had the ownership transfer registration completed on July 21, 1983 with respect to the real estate of this case which was originally owned by the deceased non-party 1 on the ground of donation on July 13, 1983, and the defendant received 1/4 share of the real estate of this case from the deceased non-party 1 on the registration day, and issued the disposition of this case on the ground that the plaintiff was given a donation by the deceased non-party 1 on the above registration day, and the court below adopted the non-party 4 on July 9, 1973 to the deceased non-party 1 on the deceased non-party 1 on the deceased non-party 1 and the deceased non-party 1 on August 15, 1983 on the ground that the non-party 4, who was the plaintiff's fraudulent act, obtained the consent of the non-party 2 and 3 on July 13, 1983 on the above registration cancellation of ownership transfer registration.

In light of the records, the above fact-finding and judgment of the court below are just, and there is no error in the misapprehension of the legal principles as to the mistake of facts or the litigation due to the violation of the rules of evidence.

If the transfer registration of ownership in the name of the plaintiff, which was made on the ground of donation, is null and void as the court below decided, it cannot be deemed that the property was acquired by the gift of another person provided for in Article 29-2 of the Inheritance Tax Act, even if it was made in the form of cancellation of the donation by the method of restitution thereafter, even if the transfer registration of ownership in the name of the plaintiff was made in the form of cancellation of the

Therefore, the appeal is 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 Man-hee (Presiding Justice)