Appropriateness of Individual Land Price

The disposition of this case which assessed the value of donated property according to the officially assessed individual land price in 1992 on the ground that the officially assessed individual land price was not publicly announced in 193 as of January 1, 193 before May 22, 1993, although the officially assessed individual land price was publicly announced as of January 1, 193.

The contents of the decision shall be the same as attached.

1. The part of the Defendant’s imposition of KRW 10,505,530, 1993 against the Plaintiffs on October 16, 1994, which exceeds KRW 4,651,614, respectively, shall be revoked. The remaining claims of the Plaintiffs on February 1, 199, shall be dismissed. 3. The costs of lawsuit shall be divided into two parts, and one part shall be borne by the Plaintiffs and the remainder by the Defendant.

1. Details of the instant disposition

갑제1호증의1,2, 갑제2호증의1내지5, 갑제3호증의1,2,3, 갑제4호증의2, 을제1호증의1,2의 각 기재에 변론의 전취지를 모아보면, ㅇㅇ시 ㅇㅇ ㅇㅇ번지 전 1,458평방미터와 같은 동 ㅇㅇ번지 전 1,074평방미터 및 같은 동 ㅇㅇ번지 전278평방미터(1994. 6. 15. 같은 동 ㅇㅇ번지 전 17평방미터와 같은 동 ㅇㅇ번지 전 37평방미터가 분할되어 나가 현재의 지적은 224평방미터임) 등 3필지 토지의 각 4분의1 지분에 관하여 1993. 4. 24. 그 소유 명의자인 소외 김ㅇㅇ으로부터 원고들에게로 같은 해 2. 23.자 명의신탁해지를 원인으로 한 지분(각 8분의1 지분) 이전등기가 경료되자, 피고는 그 등기원인이 명의신탁해지로 되어 있지만 실제로는 위 김ㅇㅇ이 그 지분(4분의1)을 원고들에게 증여한 것으로 보고 위 3필지 토지의 각 8분의1 지분(증여재산)의 가액을 증여 당시 고시되어 있던 1992년 개별공시지가(같은 동 ㅇㅇ, ㅇㅇ번지 토지는 평방미터당 115,000원, 같은 동 ㅇㅇ번지 토지는 평방미터당 110,000원)에 의하여 각 금40,220,000원으로 산정한 다음 1994. 10. 16. 원고들에게 1993년 귀속분 증여세(신고불성실가산세 포함) 각 금10,505,530원을 산출・부과(이하 이 사건 처분이라 한다)한 사실을 인정할 수 있고 달리 반증없다.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The parties' assertion

As to the Defendant’s assertion that the disposition of this case was lawful on the grounds of the above disposition and the pertinent provision of the Inheritance Tax Act, the Plaintiffs asserted that it was unlawful to assess the value of donated property according to the officially assessed individual land price in 1993, which was already publicly announced at the time of the pertinent disposition, on the ground that the Defendant was publicly announced in 192 at the time of donation, and that the officially assessed individual land price in 1993 was not yet publicly announced.

B. Relevant statutes and interpretation

(1) Articles 34-7 and 9(1) of the Inheritance Tax Act (amended by Act No. 4662 of Dec. 31, 1993) provide that the value of donated property shall be based on the current status at the time of donation. Article 5(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 14469 of Dec. 31, 1994) provides that the current status at the time of donation shall be based on the market price at the time of donation, and Article 5(2)1 of the Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax Act provides that the current status at the time of donation shall be calculated based on the method stipulated in paragraphs (2) through (6) when it is difficult to calculate the market price at the time. Article 5(2)1 of the Inheritance Tax Act provides that the assessment of land at the time of donation shall be based on the rate computed by the head of a Si/Gun/Gu in the areas designated by the Commissioner of the National Tax Service and the remaining areas shall be based on the officially assessed individual land price (individual land price).

(2) In full view of the above relevant laws and regulations, when the tax authority evaluates the value of the land which is a donated property, it shall, in principle, be based on the market price at the time of donation (the market price principle), and when it is difficult to calculate the market price of the land, it may be based on the supplementary assessment method. However, Article 5 (2) 1 of the Enforcement Decree of the above Inheritance Tax Act provides a supplementary assessment method based on the officially assessed individual land price of the year to which the date of donation belongs, and as long as Article 9 (2) 1 of the above Enforcement Decree of the above Inheritance Tax Act adopts the market price principle as to the appraisal of the donated property, it is close to this, unless the officially assessed individual land price of the year to which the date of donation belongs belongs is publicly announced until the time of taxation, it shall be applied to the most adjacent to the market price at the time of donation, but if the officially assessed individual land price of the year to which the date of donation belongs (the base date of taxation is January 1 of the corresponding year), the value of the donated land shall be interpreted to this purport.

C. Determination

(1) 앞서 본 증거들에 의하면, 이 사건 과세처분이 있기 전인 (증여일로부터 불과 1개월 후인) 1993. 5. 22. ㅇㅇ시장에 의하여 1993. 1. 1.을 기준일로 하는 1993년 개별공시지가가 고시되었고 그 개별공시지가가 ㅇㅇ시 ㅇㅇ동 ㅇㅇ, ㅇㅇ번지 토지는 평방미터당 71,500원이며 같은 동 ㅇㅇ번지 토지는 평방미터당 75,000원인 사실을 인정할 수 있으므로, 앞서 본 바와 같이 위 3필지 토지 중 각 8분의1 지분(증여재산)의 가액은 위 1993년 개별공시지가에 의하여 평가하여야 할 것인데도 피고가 1994. 10. 16. 이 사건 증여세부과처분을 하면서 증여일(1993. 4. 24.) 현재를 기준으로 할 때 1993년 개별공시지가는 고시되어 있지 아니하고 1992년 개별공시지가만이 고시되어 있다는 이유만으로 1993년 개별공시지가를 외면하고 1992년 개별공시지가에 의하여 증여재산의 가액을 평가한 이 사건 처분은 위법하다 할 것이다.

(2) Therefore, if the value of the donated property is evaluated again by the officially assessed individual land price in 1993, it shall be 25,236,00 won [1,074 square meters x 71,500 won] + (1,458 square meters x 71,500 won x 71,500 won] + (278 square meters x 75,000) x 1/8]. If the value of the donated property is deducted by 5,00,000 won for relatives under Article 31 (1) 2 of the Inheritance Tax Act from the above donated property, the taxable value shall be 20,236,000 won + 1,059,00 won (1,50,000,000 + 236,000 won x x 25,000 won x 105,005 won and 404,106,005 won for additional tax amount for additional tax amount for 10404]

3. Conclusion

Therefore, since the part exceeding the above amount of fair gift tax exceeds 4,651,614 won among the dispositions in this case, the plaintiffs' claims are accepted within the above limit of recognition, and the remaining claims are dismissed as it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition by applying Article 8 of the Administrative Litigation Act, Articles 89, 92, and 93 of the Civil Procedure Act to the burden of litigation costs.