(a) In cases where there exists a decision of correction or re-decision of correction while filing a lawsuit seeking a revocation of a tax imposition and disposition, a copy of the procedure for a prior trial on the decision of correction or

(b) Calculation of the value of inherited property that is unlisted stocks;

A. In a case where a legitimate revocation claim is pending in a lawsuit seeking a revocation of a correction or re-determination that changes the original imposition of an identical taxable object (property) while a legitimate revocation claim is pending, if there exists a correction or re-determination that changes the original imposition of an inherited property, the grounds for revocation (actual illegality of assessment of an inherited property) alleged to exist in the initial imposition disposition exist in the same manner as in the decision of correction or re-determination of an original imposition, and where the original imposition is deemed unlawful, and thus the decision of correction or re-determination cannot be unlawful, the plaintiff may seek a revocation of the correction or re-determination without the necessity to undergo a separate procedure, and there is no need to separately consider whether the period of filing a lawsuit is complied

(b) Even shares whose inherited property is not listed on the Stock Exchange, if the transaction was made close to the commencing date of the inheritance, and if the transaction was made in a general and normal manner and it is judged that the transaction price adequately reflects objective exchange values, the transaction price may be calculated by taking the market price at the time of the commencement of the inheritance into account

(a) Article 2 of the Administrative Litigation Act; Article 9 of the Inheritance Tax Act; Article 5 of the Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax Act;

[Defendant-Appellee] Plaintiff 1 and five others, Counsel for defendant-appellee

Seoul High Court Decision 200Do1448 decided May 1, 200

Seoul High Court Decision 78Gu545 delivered on October 7, 1980

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

The defendant's attorney's grounds of appeal are examined.

With respect to Section 1:

In a case where there is a correction or re-determination to change the initial imposition of the same subject matter of taxation while a legitimate lawsuit seeking revocation is pending, if the grounds for revocation (actual illegality) alleged to exist in the initial imposition of the same taxation exists as in the case of the correction or re-determination of the original imposition, the plaintiff has justifiable grounds to seek revocation of the correction or re-determination without the need to undergo separate procedure for the correction or re-determination of the purport. In such a case, if the initial lawsuit is instituted within the legitimate period for filing a lawsuit, it is reasonable to interpret that whether the period for filing a lawsuit for alteration of the purport of the correction or re-determination is not necessary separately. In this case, the plaintiffs filed a lawsuit against the original imposition of the tax base of December 31, 197, which is the initial imposition of the tax base of the tax base of the tax base of the tax base of the tax base of the case, and that the above determination and re-determination of the original imposition of the tax base of the tax base of the tax base of the 197Hun-Ga 297, which were different from the original determination method of the tax base of the tax base of the tax base of the plaintiff.

With respect to Section 2:

According to Article 9 (1) of the Inheritance Tax Act and Article 5 (1) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, when the market price at the time of the commencement of inheritance is known where shares are included among inherited property, the value of inherited property shall be calculated according to the method under Article 5 (5) of the Enforcement Decree only when the market price is calculated according to the market price and the market price is unknown. Even if shares are not listed on the Stock Exchange, if a transaction was made in close to the commencement date of inheritance and such transaction was made in a general and normal manner and it is determined that the transaction price properly reflects objective exchange values, such transaction price may be deemed the

In this regard, the court below's decision that the actual transaction price, which was close to the commencement date of inheritance of the shares of Gyeongbuk Agricultural Co., Ltd. and Samungung Co., Ltd. among the inherited property of this case, should be considered as the market price at the time of the commencement of inheritance of the above shares, and accordingly calculated the inherited

On the contrary, it cannot be accepted that the judgment of the court below is criticized on the premise that the value should be calculated at all times in accordance with the method of Article 5 (5) of the Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax Act.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of the appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Shin Jong-young (Presiding Justice)