Seoul Administrative Court 2014Guhap5965 ( November 07, 2014)

There is no purpose of tax avoidance in the instant stock title trust.

The title trust of the instant shares was made for the purpose of defending management rights, and there was a minor reduction of tax amount of 4 million won in global income tax on dividend income as incidental thereto, and thus, it cannot be deemed that there was a tax avoidance purpose in the instant title trust.

Article 45-2 of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act as Donation of Title Trust)

2014Nu52130 Revocation of Disposition of Imposing gift tax

JAA

BB Director of the Tax Office

May 23, 2014

March 10, 2015

April 14, 2015

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasons for this court's ruling shall be the first instance court's decision, except for the dismissal of the following:

Therefore, in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, a person

shall be used.

○ 2,7 pages “(the shares of this case were 84,000 shares free of charge around June 2008)”

(2) the Corporation shall add.

○ The last 7 pages "a loan" or "a loan" shall be deemed to be "a loaned".

○ 10 up to 11 pages 17 from “A” to “at the time of dismissal” as follows:

-friendly.

Since the United StatesA resolved a title trust in only one year, there is a dividend income to be additionally avoided.

The United StatesA was not in the position of an oligopolistic stockholder regardless of the title trust, and the United StatesA was not in the position of an oligopolistic stockholder.

D. Since the instant shares are listed shares, secondary tax liability or between the secondary tax liability due to the acquisition of unlisted shares.

Since there is no room to avoid the prime acquisition tax, securities transaction tax imposed on the transaction of listed stocks is a short rate of 0.5% (0.5%), securities transaction tax to be avoided regardless of who is the nominal owner of the instant stocks.

C. The shares of this case may not be presented, and the shares of this case shall be returned from the name of the plaintiff to the name of the United StatesA.

**The capital gains tax that has been avoided as it appears to have been sold under subparagraph 1 of the Investment Growth Association.

In addition, the United StatesA shares in this case under the name of the plaintiff for the purpose of defending management rights of the corporation A.

208. 8. Management right of 2008. 8.

In order to sell the shares of this case at the price included in the premium, the shares are taken over from the plaintiff.

In light of the above, the shares of this case are sold to a third party from the beginning.

Since the title was planned to be returned to the United StatesA, it shall be deemed that the United StatesA had made such plan.

It is possible to bear when transferring the shares of this case as a primary major shareholder at the time of title trust of the shares

Considering the fact that it is difficult to deem that there was an attempt to avoid the transfer income tax of the state.

2. Conclusion

The judgment of the first instance is justifiable. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.