It is assessed as a supplementary assessment method for transfer of non-listed stock at low price without a special relationship and imposes gift tax on transfer margin.

Since the market price means the objective exchange price formed by the general and normal transaction, in order for such transaction example to be recognized as the market price, it should be recognized that the transaction concerned is made in a general and normal manner and properly reflects the objective exchange value at the time of the donation.

Article 35(2) of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act

Cheongju District Court-2015-Gu Partnership-10105 (No. 21, 2015)

Because of the application of transaction example prior to each acquisition of shares, it is considerably higher than the market price.

No value may be deemed lower than the market value, and even if the acquisition value of each of the shares in this case is lower than the market value.

There is no reasonable reason in terms of transaction practice in the formation of such value.

Therefore, each of the dispositions of this case made on different premise is unlawful.

B. Relevant statutes

It is as shown in the attached Form.

(c) Fact of recognition;

1) The details of transactions on the stocks of Z from 2008 to 2011 are as listed below.

2) The Z must prevail in a lawsuit claiming the refund of the lease deposit in progress between the ZE.

The EE filed an application for compulsory execution with respect to the shares of the KIM and the KCR Construction Co., Ltd.

In the auction procedure initiated accordingly, the total construction of the Z shall be 10,000,000 stocks of the Z.

The award was received in the source, and the Z has been awarded the stocks of the general construction in the amount of KRW 220,000,000.

The Z shall be the same with the location of the general construction of the LIM, and the Z shall be the representative of the Z, and the Z shall be the general

60.58% of the shares of construction are owned.

3) JungG shall be the children of JungD, and KRW 80,000,000 in cash from JungD around July 201.

Following the donation, on June 23, 2011, shares were acquired from JeongK. On the other hand, JungG acquired shares from JungK.

Before preparing a sales contract over two occasions, the price per share shall be at least 15,526 won;

The transfer income tax was changed to 46,003 won, and fixed KK on July 12, 2013, as amended by the contract amount.

A revised return on securities transaction tax and from June 23, 201, the day on which JungG acquired shares.

D. On July 13, 2011, when three weeks elapsed, the payment of the price shall be made to Jeong K, the transferor, from the day of July 13, 201.

The period was ever.

4) The Court of Justice, as the child of MadD, also has cashed from MadD, as in the MadG.

Pursuant to the gift, the shares were acquired from H, and the sales contract was entered into between H and H.

The price per share was changed from 15,000 won to 22,561 won, and the H changed from 15,000 won to 22,561 won.

On July 12, 2013, a revised return on capital gains tax and securities transaction tax was filed as amended amount of contract;

Information D. From December 16, 2010 to June 14, 2010, six months after the date on which shares are transferred.

In several times, the transferor has been paid the price to H.

5) The plaintiff AA shall be Z from the time when the plaintiff was working as the head of the △△ Bank's UA branch.

There was a lot of assistance in the financial transactions of the Z, but the Z has been distributed to shareholders of the Z in the future.

Z in the light of the answer to those which have been so developed while it is expected to be implemented in a large number of areas.

corporation, etc. in relation to the calculation of the transfer value.

of 15,000 won per share shall be transferred to 15,000 won.

In addition, the plaintiff submitted a written confirmation that he/she has acquired shares by consenting thereto, and the plaintiff

BB, and CCC submitted a written confirmation to the same effect.

6) The Z does not pay dividends entirely from the establishment of around 1994 until 2010.

Distribution of an amount equivalent to twice the acquisition price of each of the shares to the plaintiffs in 2011 and 2012

was implemented.

7) 한편, ㈜XX엔지니어링은 2015. 3. 24. 경매절차에서 ZZ의 주식 2,344주

를 1주당 34,129원에 낙찰받았는데, ㈜XX엔지니어링은 ZZ와 같은 건물에 위치하고

There is a 88% of the shares of Madddd, MaG and Mag, their children.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 2, 4, 7, 9, 11, Eul evidence 1, 2, 3, 5 through 19

Each entry of evidence, the purport of the whole pleading

D. Determination

1) Article 35(2) of the former Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act (amended by Act No. 1035, Feb. 2, 199

in the case of transfer or receipt, the value which is remarkably lower than the market value without good cause under transaction practices.

the price and the market price of the property only if the property is acquired or transferred at a significantly high price.

amount equivalent to the difference shall be presumed to have been donated and equivalent to the interest prescribed by the Presidential Decree.

The amount of such profit shall be considered as the value of property donated to the person who acquired such profit.

In addition, Article 60 (1) and (3) of the same Act provides that the value of donated property shall be the date of donation.

Where it is difficult to calculate the market price and calculate the market price, the kind, scale and transaction of the property concerned.

the value assessed by the method under Articles 61 through 65 in consideration of the circumstances, etc.

On the other hand, the market price under paragraph (1) is between many and unspecified persons.

acceptance and acceptance in such value as would normally be deemed to have been established if a transaction is made.

It includes the sale price and appraisal price, and others recognized as the market price in accordance with Presidential Decree.

C. The main sentence of Article 49(1)1 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 2010, Jan.

a transaction of the property in question, if any, shall be deemed to be the market price.

"Amount" in the proviso and the value of such transaction with a person with a special relationship.

There is a provision that "except where it is deemed objectively unreasonable."

Therefore, even in the case of unlisted stocks with low market feasibility, there is a fact of sale.

, the value of the shares shall be assessed at the market price, and such value shall be assessed at the market price.

the market price shall not be assessed by shockal assessment methods, but the market price shall not be a general and normal transaction.

this transactional value is the market price formed by the transactional value.

at the time of donation made in a general and normal manner to determine

Any circumstances that may reasonably reflect an objective exchange value should be recognized (and

Court Decision 2010Du26988 decided April 26, 2012

2) In light of the relevant laws and legal principles as seen earlier, each of the facts acknowledged earlier is acknowledged.

In other words, the following circumstances acknowledged to show the overall purport of evidence and pleading:

transaction cases presented as the basis for calculating the acquisition price of each stock, shall be all of the parties to the transaction.

A child of a close location or Maddddi or Maddi, which is a general and general among many and unspecified persons;

(2) The price of the stock awarded at an auction in 2008 shall not be deemed to have been a normal stock transaction.

The amount of such auction shall be the same as the Z and the area of which the successful bidder of the auction is the majority shareholder.

As a general constructor, it can be seen that this was a general and normal stock transaction among many and unspecified persons.

There is no value of the stock awarded in the auction in 2015, and the successful bidder of the auction in 2015 also is Z.

건물에 위치하고 있고 정DD 및 그 자녀 등이 주식의 대부분을 보유하고 있는 ㈜XX

Since it is engineering, this is also a general and normal share between many unspecified persons.

(3) The bid price of each of the above auction is not considered to have been previously, and all of the shares of this case.

Each State of this case in that it is calculated at approximately two years before or about five years after the point of time of transaction.

as to whether the objective exchange values at the time of transfer are not deemed to properly reflect; 4

The motive and circumstance of the acquisition of each of the instant shares between the Plaintiffs and ED, circumstances after the acquisition, etc.

In light of the fact that the transfer value of each of the instant shares is determined by normal transaction.

There is no circumstance to consider it as being difficult, and 15,000 won per share, the acquisition value of each of the shares in this case.

16,000 won much less than the price calculated by the supplementary method of assessment under the former Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act.

the remaining surplus of the disposal profit at the end of 2010 shall be KRW 15,635,00,000.

The sum of the total issued stocks of the Z shall be calculated by dividing it into 60,000 shares, causing 260,590 won per share.

Comprehensively taking account of the foregoing, the value of each of the instant shares acquired by the Plaintiffs is general and fixed.

It is difficult to regard it as a market price reflecting objective exchange value formed through commercial transactions, and such price

Terms and conditions of transaction under Article 35(2) of the former Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act, in which the same transfer value is determined;

It is difficult to see that there is "reasons".

3) Therefore, the plaintiffs' assertion cannot be accepted in entirety, and the defendant's disposition of this case is each of the defendant.

Sector is legitimate.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiffs' claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so ordered.

shall be determined as above.

Park fixed-type and 2

Head of Cheongju Tax Office

A. 448,207,290 won, as gift tax imposed on Plaintiff A on March 3, 2014 by the head of a Ghana Tax Office, and that:

A. The gift tax imposed on Plaintiff BB on March 3, 2014 by the head of a Ghana Tax Office, KRW 448,207,290, and the Daejeon Tax imposed on Defendant BB

In order to revoke each disposition of imposition of gift tax of KRW 378,285,390 against Plaintiff CCC on March 3, 2014.

section 3.

2015.05.21

1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed. 2. Costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Cheong-gu Office

1. Details of the disposition;

(a) The comprehensive Z firm (hereinafter referred to as the “ZZ”) is a company established on January 4, 1994 and engaged in construction design and supervision, appraisal of buildings, construction supervision, civil works execution, construction work execution, etc.

B. On December 14, 2010, Plaintiff AA and BB acquired 3,000 shares of the Z from static, the representative director of the Z, and the major shareholder, respectively, KRW 15,000 per share, and KRW 45,000,000 per share. The Plaintiff CCC acquired 3,000 shares of the Z from the said ZD from November 28, 201 to KRW 16,00 per share, total price of KRW 48,00,000 per share (hereinafter “each shares”).

C. On October 21, 2013, the Daejeon Regional Tax Office conducted an investigation into changes in stocks of the Z with respect to the acquisition of each of the instant shares. As a result, the acquisition of each of the instant shares was conducted at a price significantly lower than the market price and there is no justifiable ground for transaction practice. Therefore, the acquisition of each of the instant shares constitutes a donation of profits arising from the transfer of property at a low price. Accordingly, on October 21, 2013, the Daejeon Regional Tax Office notified the Plaintiffs of the difference under Articles 60(3) and 63(1)1 (c) of the former Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act (amended by Act No. 11130, Dec. 31, 201; hereinafter “former Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act”), Articles 54(1), (2), (5), 55, and 56(1)1 (3) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 23040, Jul. 25, 2011).

D. On December 5, 2013, the Plaintiffs filed a request for pre-assessment review with the Director of the Daejeon Regional Tax Office, but all requests were made on February 13, 2014. On March 3, 2014, Defendant AB Tax Office rendered a decision to non-adopted each of them. Defendant AB Tax Office: (a) on March 3, 2014, issued a decision to impose gift tax and additional tax on Plaintiff AAA on March 3, 2014; (b) on Plaintiff AB Tax Office: (c) KRW 448,207,290; and (d) on Plaintiff CCC on March 3, 2014; and (c) on March 3, 2014, Defendant CCC issued a disposition to impose gift tax and additional tax on each of them (hereinafter “each of the instant dispositions”).

E. On April 28, 2014, the Plaintiffs filed a petition for adjudication seeking revocation of each of the dispositions of this case with the Director of the Tax Tribunal on April 28, 2014, but each of the above claims was dismissed on October 22, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 7, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 4, 5 through 8 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether each of the dispositions of this case is legitimate

A. The plaintiffs' assertion

The acquisition value of each of the instant shares determined by the Plaintiffs is not a special relationship and is freely determined by pursuing each of the economic interests between the parties to an equal transaction.