The case holding that there is an unlawful act of not including in the value of inheritance tax, the amount of money deposited in the old account under the name of the decedent with no credibility; or the amount of money consumed by the decedent, the use of which is unclear;

The case holding that there is an unlawful act of not including in the taxable amount of inheritance tax the amount of money which has no credibility and has not been used in the taxable amount of inheritance tax for the money deposited in the old account under the name of the decedent with no credibility; or

Article 7-2 of the Inheritance Tax Act, Article 187 of the Civil Procedure Act

Jung-young et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellee

The Director of the Pacific District Office

Seoul High Court Decision 89Gu222 delivered on August 29, 1989

The part of the judgment below against the defendant shall be reversed, and that part shall be remanded to the Seoul High Court.

All appeals by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

1. Judgment on the defendant's appeal

The court below acknowledged that the money deposited in the bill management territory of the Korea Investment Finance Corporation in the name of the deceased Kim Jong-chul was deposited with the business income earned by the plaintiff Young-chul from the business of the business of the deceased Young-chul. However, according to the records, although the defendant Kim Young-chul testified as a witness, the building that operated the business of the plaintiff Young-chul Kim Young-chul-si at the end of 1981, it was confirmed that the deceased Kim Young-si was the deceased's possession of the real estate acquired at that time, and that the deceased disposed of various real estate between the time of the death after his retirement in 1983, since it was difficult to view that the deceased's business was conducted on his own account under the name of the plaintiff Young-si, and if there is another deposit account in the name of the deceased, the court below acknowledged that the above defendant's testimony management of the deceased's real estate was unfair.

In addition, the court below held that the amount of KRW 160,00,000,00,00,000,000,000,000,000, which was borrowed from the decedent to pay for living expenses before the decedent, shall be offset against the loan of KRW 10,00,00,000, and 60,00,00,00,00,00,00,00,

However, according to the records, the court below's testimony to the effect that the purchase cost of the automobile 20 million won is consistent with the fact that the use of the automobile 20 million won is clear, but the automobile 140 million won is consumed by the daily living expenses. However, the contents of the testimony are inconsistent with the fact-finding of the evidence No. 13 which he has obtained through the lawsuit, and it is difficult to accept the fact that he consumed the automobile 140 million won as the witness's testimony or the living expenses within the short period of time, and it is difficult to accept the fact that he consumed the automobile 140 million won as a result, it is difficult to view that the use of the money 1.40

In addition, the court below held that the defendant's 66.4 million won out of the money for the purchase of the plaintiff Jong-Hy's players, village apartment was withdrawn from the National Investment Trust Unit of the deceased Kim Jong-chul and the gift of the amount was made, and that each tax disposition was unlawful for the defendant's taxation. The court below pointed out that the money was all the plaintiff's money and decided that the defendant's 15.5 million won out of the Korea Investment Trust Unit of the Korea Investment Bank of Korea was illegal. However, although there was a decision that the money is in substance the ownership of the plaintiff Jong-young, the court below's 5.1.4 million won out of the Korea Investment Bank of Korea's Korean Investment Bank of Korea, without a statement of the reasons that the money should be deemed as the ownership of the deceased's beneficiary's right of due interest, it is improper to make such decision without the plaintiff's 5.1.4 million won out of the Korea Investment Bank of Korea's investment Bank of Korea, and on the grounds stated above, it should be deemed that the defendant's title

Therefore, it is difficult to maintain the part of the judgment of the court below against the defendant only on the grounds of the above decision without making a decision as to whether the appeal against other points is lodged.

2. Judgment on the Plaintiff’s appeal

According to Article 9(1) of the Inheritance Tax Act and Article 5(1) and 5(2)1 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, the appeal to the effect that the value of the land or building, which is inherited property, was within a specific area prescribed by the Commissioner of the National Tax Service at the time of the commencement of the inheritance, shall be based on the rate determined by the Commissioner of the National Tax Service

3. The plaintiffs' appeals are all dismissed, and the part of the judgment below against the defendant is reversed by the defendant's appeal and the part of the case is remanded to the court below. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Kim Yong-sung (Presiding Justice)