beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Details of the disposition;
A. From June 30, 2016 to August 10, 2016, the director of the Seoul Regional Tax Office confirmed the fact that C, the representative director of B (hereinafter “B”) acquired 4,900 shares in the name of D, and 200 shares in the name of E, respectively, on March 5, 2008, respectively. 3,00 shares in D were changed to the name of the Plaintiff on December 6, 201, and on December 27, 201, the Plaintiff acquired 4,800 shares through capital increase with capital increase in accordance with the Plaintiff’s share ownership ratio of B, and the fact that the capital increase was not paid.
B. The director of the Seoul Regional Tax Office: (a) deemed C to have held the pertinent shares 7,800 shares (hereinafter “instant shares”) each under title trust with the Plaintiff; and (b) notified the Defendant of the imposition of gift tax pursuant to Article 45-2(1) of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act (amended by Act No. 11130, Dec. 31, 201; hereinafter “former Inheritance Tax Act”).
C. On December 9, 2016, the Defendant issued a separate notice of determination of KRW 415,93,40 (including additional taxation) of gift tax on KRW 612,891,930 of gift tax on KRW 614,700 of gift tax of KRW 614,703,00 of shares whose name was changed from D to Plaintiff according to the investigation by the Seoul Regional Tax Office, and KRW 4,800 of gift tax on KRW 393,048,00 of gift tax on KRW 393,00 of gift tax on KRW 4,800 of gift tax acquired by capital increase in accordance with the Plaintiff’s equity holding ratio (hereinafter “each of the instant dispositions”).
On February 27, 2017, the Plaintiff filed a tax appeal on February 27, 2017, but the Tax Tribunal dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim on June 27, 2017.
E. The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against C on the ground that “C was liable to pay gift tax, such as the instant disposition, as a result of acquiring the instant shares at a low price by stealing the Plaintiff’s name,” with the Dongbu District Court 2017Gahap10060, and the said court held that C was liable to pay the Plaintiff KRW 415,93,400 and damages for delay.