Seoul Administrative Court 2015Guhap54926 ( October 13, 2015)

Money deposited by an ancestor shall not be deemed as non-taxable living expenses under social norms.

(As stated in the judgment of the first instance court) Considering that the amount of income for the preceding five years of the Plaintiff’s transfer, the current status of holding real estate, stocks, etc., and the balance to the Plaintiff’s other deposit accounts before and after the date of account transfer, the amount deposited by the decedent to the Plaintiff cannot be deemed as the living

Article 31 of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act

Revocation of Disposition Imposing Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax

○ ○ 2 others

The director of the tax office.

May 13, 2016

September 1, 2016

September 29, 2016

1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

The judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked. The defendant shall revoke all imposition of KRW 858,560,166 on September 14, 2012 on the plaintiff ○○○○, the inheritance tax of KRW 858,560,166 on the plaintiff ○○○○, the imposition of KRW 193,859,270 on the gift tax of August 14, 2012 on the plaintiff ○○○○, the imposition of KRW 193,859,270 on the plaintiff ○○○, and the imposition of KRW 200,52

1. Quotation of the reasons for the judgment of the first instance;

The reasoning of this court's judgment is identical to that of the first instance court, except where "the third and third pages 18 of the judgment is not deducted". Thus, this court's judgment is cited in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Conclusion

Since the judgment of the first instance is justifiable, the plaintiffs' appeal is dismissed for lack of grounds.