Whether a title trust contract is terminated or not

It is reasonable to view that the form of a transfer of shares or substance constitutes a return of shares following the termination of a title trust agreement, such as where a transferor only lends his/her name, but does not have been involved in the transfer of shares or the management of the company, but has returned the shares received under the name.

Donation at the time of transfer at the low price or high price under Article 35 of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act

1. The Defendant’s disposition of imposition of KRW 659,941,850 on April 17, 2001 against the Plaintiff on December 17, 2005 is revoked.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On April 17, 2001, the Plaintiff was the representative director of ○○○ Co., Ltd. (hereinafter, Nonparty Co., Ltd.), and acquired 17,100 shares (33.53% of the total issued shares) of Nonparty Co., Ltd. in the form of transfer of KRW 10,000 per share at par value (hereinafter, “acquisition of the instant shares”).

B. On December 17, 2005, the Defendant issued a disposition of gift tax of KRW 659,941,850 on the ground that the non-party company ○○ invested more than 30% of the total number of issued shares and controlled it as the representative director of the non-party company. The Plaintiff is an employee of the non-party company. Thus, the Plaintiff’s acquisition of the Plaintiff’s shares constitutes a case where the Plaintiff acquires the property at a price lower than the market price from a person in a special relationship under Article 35 of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act.

C. The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit of this case upon filing a request for national tax adjudication following the filing of an objection under the Framework Act on National Taxes, but all dismissed.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The Plaintiff asserts that the acquisition of the shares of this case does not take over shares from ○○○, but merely received a return on the termination of the title trust relationship with the fact that the title of shares was transferred to ○○○○. Even if the Plaintiff was transferred to ○○○○○, the Plaintiff and ○○○ did not actually control the company, and thus, the disposition of this case is unlawful.

B. Relevant statutes

It is as shown in the attached Form.

C. Determination

First of all, we examine whether the acquisition of the shares in this case was true due to the transfer of the shares, or merely due to the termination of the title trust relationship between the plaintiff and the ○○○○○○. In full view of the entries of Nos. 2, 4, and 5 (including paper numbers) and the partial entry of No. 3, witness Lee○, and testimony and the whole pleadings of the non-party company at the time of May 22, 1991, the plaintiff acquired the non-party company from Kim○, which was the representative director of the non-party company at the time of the entry in the list of shareholders. Unlike the entry in the list of shareholders, the plaintiff actually transferred the non-party company to the non-party company by requesting the non-party company to transfer the shares to the non-party company as its owner at the time of the request, and then the non-party company was registered as the director of the non-party company at the same time as the representative director of the non-party company, and the non-party company again acquired the shares in this case's name and 10.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the disposition of this case, which was based on the premise that the plaintiff acquired shares from this ○○○, is unlawful without any need to examine the facts. Thus, the plaintiff's claim is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.