logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전고등법원(청주) 2016.09.07 2015누10408
증여세부과처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff (appointed party)'s appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff (Appointed Party).

Reasons

1. The reasons why the court should explain this part of the disposition are the same as the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, this part of the reasoning is cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Judgment on the merits

A. The reasoning for the court’s explanation concerning this part is as follows.

The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except the addition of the judgment on the plaintiff's assertion in the trial as stated in the paragraph. Thus, it is accepted as it is in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article

B. 1) The part added by the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the value of the instant shares, the non-listed shares of which are non-listed shares, was amended by Act No. 11845, May 28, 2013; hereinafter “former Inheritance Tax Act”).

() In assessing the net asset value per share by supplementary evaluation methods stipulated in Article 63(1)1(c) of this Act and Article 54 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 26069, Feb. 3, 2015) as KRW 19,706 per share, the liabilities listed in the balance sheet of the company (1,123,490,130 on the balance sheet of 207) and other “actual liabilities of the company of this case” [the liabilities listed in the balance sheet of this case as of May 26, 2008 are KRW 4,323,41,411,456 on the balance sheet of this case and those other than those not appropriated on the balance sheet of this case are KRW 3,199,921,326 (= 4,323,411,456 won - 123,130,130) were not reflected in the taxation disposition of this case.

Since the burden of proof on the existence of the facts is imposed on the tax authorities, in assessing the value of unlisted stocks under the former Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act at the time of the transfer of unlisted stocks, the basis for determining the amount of income, which is the

arrow