Seoul High Court-2018-Nu-54738 ( November 23, 2018)

The value under a stock sales contract shall not be the market value prescribed by the former Corporate Tax Act, and it shall not be deemed the market value at the time of acquisition, as it is not an amount reflecting the

It is difficult to view that the stock transaction in this case was conducted based on a bearer contract similar to exchange between the three parties, and that the value under the stock transfer contract is not the amount determined through the appraisal of shares, but the net asset value in the account book is the same as the net asset value in light of the complicated control relationship of the EE corporation at the time.

Article 41 of the Corporate Tax Act; Article 63 of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act

Supreme Court-2018-Du-66531 (No. 08, 2019)

AAAAAA

B. Incidental Appellant

BBB

-Supplementary Appellee

△△△ Director

Seoul High Court Decision 2018Nu54738 Decided November 23, 2018

2019.04.08

All appeals and supplementary appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendant, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff (Supplementary Appellant).

The records of this case, the judgment of the court below, and the grounds of incidental appeal were examined. However, the allegation regarding the grounds of appeal by the appellant and the grounds of incidental appeal by the incidental appellant constitutes Article 4 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure of Appeal, and therefore, the appeal and incidental appeal are all dismissed pursuant to Article 5 of the above Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices