Title trust and tax avoidance purpose of the instant shares are recognized.

As alleged by the plaintiffs, even if there was a purpose of avoiding the lending limit by person or issue, such purpose and intent of tax avoidance was also intended.

Article 45-2 of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act

2014-Revocation of Disposition of Imposing gift tax

A,B

A prepared a certificate to the effect that each of the accounts of this case was opened without A’s consent.

(c) under this law, however, is not superior to what S has set up or obtained its consent.

In other words, if the customer desires, it would be likely that the opening of the establishment would be a problem.

c. 'I will not, as a matter of course, be used for other purposes', and 'I will not, if any.

The idea that it would oppose was no longer, and it was flick because it was a mother and simple flick."

E testified to the effect that it is well known to the PlaintiffB, and the plaintiffs are family members and actually shares.

Whether the actual owner of the sold land would be equal to the amount of taxes to whom he or she would not be punished because he or she would not be punished.

was rejected if it was illegal, but it was the parent's account and the loan fee.

The testimony was made to the effect that it would not have a big problem if the normal tax was paid.

2) Judgment on the second argument

A) Legislative purport of "the constructive gift of the nominal trust property" under Article 45-2 (1) of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act

tax justice is realized by effectively preventing tax avoidance by using the title trust system.

In the purport of recognizing the exception to substance over form principle, title trust is subject to tax avoidance.

Recognizing that it was made for reasons other than the enemy, a minor section incidental to the title trust.

If tax reduction takes place only, the fact that such title trust had an objective of tax avoidance.

No determination may be made, however, in light of the legislative intent above, tax for the purpose of title trust.

The rate of deemed donation by applying the proviso to the same Article only if the purpose of avoidance is not included;

As such, the tax association is deemed to have the intent of tax avoidance with the other main purpose.

The burden of proof as to the absence of the purpose of tax avoidance can not be said to be a non-purpose.

(1) A person who asserts the title of this case (Supreme Court Decision 2007Du19331 Decided April 9, 2009; Supreme Court Decision 2007Du1931 Decided April

See Supreme Court Decision 2007Du17175 Decided September 8, 2011, etc.). The burden of proof as above is borne by the aforementioned burden of proof.

The nominal owner, as the nominal owner, has no objective of tax avoidance in the title trust, so long as there is no objective of tax avoidance.

There was no superior objective, and there was no tax to be avoided in the future at the time of title trust.

there is no doubt that there is ordinary person by objective and acceptable evidence.

to the extent of proof (Supreme Court Decision 2004Du11220 Decided September 22, 2006; Supreme Court Decision 2004Du11220 Decided February 201)

24. See, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Du23569.

B) In the instant case, the Plaintiffs were to avoid the lending limit by Plaintiff B’s person and by issue.

The plaintiff Gap held that there was no purpose of tax avoidance because the shares of this case were trusted in title.

As such, health units, Gap, 5 to 8, 10, 15 to 17, 21 to 25 (including each number)

The purpose of tax avoidance in the instant title trust solely with each statement, witness S and E’s testimony

It is insufficient to acknowledge that there was no such a absence, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it, rather than the above.

The following circumstances are revealed by the facts of recognition, i.e., the Plaintiff’s shares of this case

A, by title trust, the Plaintiff B, the actual owner of the global income tax on dividend income, etc.

(2) Plaintiff B shall be subject to cumulative taxation in comparison with that subject to cumulative taxation.

under section 94(1)3 of the Income Tax Act by holding the shares of this case in the name A

In fact, it is difficult to grasp whether the income tax is subject to report, and the plaintiff B appears in his name.

Only the transfer of shares of two corporations that meet the requirements of a large shareholder with limited shares;

The income tax was returned, and four persons who meet the requirements for major shareholders when adding up the shares in the name of the plaintiff A.

(3) Plaintiff B did not report the transfer income tax on the share transfer in this case.

The amount of tax reduced by the title trust is not significant, and the global income tax and amount each year for such title trust.

In light of the fact that the burden of Do income tax, etc. can be reduced, as alleged by the Plaintiffs, the burden may be reduced.

Even if there is a purpose to avoid the lending limit by person or issue, such purpose as well as the lending limit.

It is reasonable to view that there was the intent of tax avoidance. Therefore, the plaintiffs' above assertion is also groundless.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, all of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Head of Dong Daegu Tax Office

october 1, 2014

November 21, 2014

1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

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

The disposition of imposition of gift tax of KRW 1,597,686,080 (including penalty tax) on the plaintiffs on November 1, 2012 by the defendant of the Gu office against the plaintiffs on November 1, 2012 shall be revoked.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. As of December 31, 2009, the Plaintiff A opened each securities account in the name of H Co., Ltd. and W Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “each of the instant accounts”). As of December 31, 2009, the listed shares owned in the name of Plaintiff B via each of the instant accounts are 18 items,734,489 shares (hereinafter “instant shares”).

B. On July 9 to August 7, 2012, the director of the Daegu Regional Tax Office: (a) determined that the Plaintiff was in title trust with the Plaintiff for the purpose of tax evasion; (b) notified the Plaintiff of the result of the tax investigation to the Plaintiff; and (c) notified the Defendant of the result of the tax investigation; (d) requested a pre-assessment review on September 27, 2012, but (c) decided to dismiss the request on October 29, 2012 by the Daegu Regional Tax Service Commissioner. The Defendant deemed that the Plaintiff was donated the instant shares from the Plaintiff on December 31, 2009 pursuant to Article 45-2 of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the “Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act”); and (d) designated the Plaintiff as the taxpayer of the gift tax, 1,597, 686, 80 (including additional tax, and hereinafter referred to as “the Plaintiff’s joint and several tax payment notice”).

D. The Plaintiffs dissatisfied with the request for adjudication on January 25, 2013, but the Tax Tribunal decided to dismiss the request on December 23, 2013.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiffs' assertion

1) The Plaintiff B promised not to make a stock investment again to the Plaintiff A, who is her mother, while having been divorced due to a failure to make a stock investment. If the Plaintiff A becomes aware of the Plaintiff’s stock investment in the Plaintiff B, it would have been in an unreasonable column. Nevertheless, there was a need for the Plaintiff B to open a securities account in the name of a third party to avoid the limit of loans by type of the Plaintiff’s stock investment. Accordingly, the Plaintiff B opened each of the instant accounts under the Plaintiff’s name and held the instant shares without undergoing a personal verification procedure under the understanding of the employees of the securities company. Accordingly, since the Plaintiff B used the Plaintiff’s name by misappropriation, it cannot be said that a title trust agreement on the instant shares was concluded between the Plaintiffs.

2) Even if there was a title trust agreement between the Plaintiffs, each of the instant accounts used in the instant stock transaction was opened for the purpose of avoiding the limit of loans by person and issue, according to the proposal of the employees of the securities company, and the amount additionally avoided despite not intended, is merely a minor amount, and thus, the title trust of the instant shares constitutes a case where there is no tax avoidance purpose.

(b) Related statutes;

It is as shown in the attached Table related statutes.

(c) Fact of recognition;

1) As of December 31, 2009, the shares of this case held by Plaintiff B through each of the instant accounts under the Plaintiff’s name as of December 31, 2009 are 18 Category 1,734,489 in total. The total appraised value of the shares of this case under the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act reaches KRW 3,006,047,793 (Evidence No. 4-1, 2) (Account Number: 66723050-01).

W square Points (Account Number: 200-01-167253)

2) On May 19, 2005, Plaintiff B opened a securities account (Account Number: 669910-01) of Plaintiff A at the Daegu branch of H investment securities (Evidence No. 28), and on October 13, 2005, Plaintiff B transferred the securities account (Account Number: 66723050-01) in the name of Plaintiff A at the H investment securities branch.

3) At the time, K in charge of H investment securities branch directly visited Plaintiff A to undergo a personal identification procedure. At that time, Plaintiff A entered in a new transaction application the name, resident registration number, account password, CD password, and home-based telephone number, and affixed a seal imprint (Evidence A No. 12-1, No. 13).

4) Thereafter, on April 10, 2007, Plaintiff B changed the management point to Hinvestment securities Daegu Branch (Account Number: 66723050-01), and on July 31, 2009, Plaintiff B filed an application for the change and re-issuance of the management point to H Investment Securities Squa, and Plaintiff B filed an application for each of the above customer information correction, and at the time, S did not undergo a separate procedure for direct identification with Plaintiff A.

5) Meanwhile, on September 7, 2009, Plaintiff B opened an account under the Plaintiff’s name (Account Number: 200-01-167253), and the employee in charge did not undergo a direct identification procedure with respect to Plaintiff B. However, a copy of the Plaintiff’s resident registration certificate is attached to the application form for opening of an account.

6) As the Plaintiff was engaged in large-scale stock transactions through each of the instant accounts opened by the Plaintiff A through stock transfer, additional loans, etc., the Plaintiff became subject to comprehensive financial income taxation. According to the computerized data of the National Tax Service’s national tax integration system, it is confirmed that the Plaintiff was served with a notice of global income tax return on the financial income accrued in May 7, 2011 (Evidence 8-1 through 3).

7) In addition, due to the rapid increase in income in the name of the Plaintiff A due to the opening of each of the instant accounts and the stock transaction, the payment of the basic old age pension, which was paid to the Plaintiff A, was suspended, and a considerable amount of health insurance premium was imposed on Plaintiff A

8) The main contents of the Plaintiff A’s answer written on August 6, 2012 prepared by the Daegu Regional Tax Office at the time of investigating the source of funds related to the instant shares are as follows.

9) Each written confirmation (Evidence No. 11-1, No. 26-1) to the effect that Hinvestment Securities Employees S and W-Investment Securities Employees E, who participated in the opening of each of the instant accounts, requested that the Plaintiff opened a securities account by stealing the Plaintiff’s name and making it possible for the Plaintiff to open the securities account. However, the court testified as follows.

10) With respect to whether it is possible for N to open an account under the name of another person when opening an account under the name of another person, 'Winvestment securities merchant account opened on September 7, 2009 in the name of the Plaintiff 'the account opened by the principal' and 'the opening of an account is impossible in the case of opening by the principal (Evidence 3)' (No. 3). In the case of H Investment Securities Squa customer document (application No. 13 of October 13, 2005) in the case of H Investment Securities Squa customer document (application No. 13 of October 13, 2005), the H Investment Securities Squa customer document was confirmed as a document that it was processed after verification through the employee visit process, and in the case of opening of an account under the provision, it was dealt with after verification after identification (Evidence 4).

11) Meanwhile, by trading the instant stocks under the Plaintiff’s name, the Plaintiff B was subject to cumulative taxation with Plaintiff B, the global income tax on dividend income, etc., more than KRW 10 million compared to the case of cumulative taxation with Plaintiff B, the actual owner. In addition, Plaintiff B made it difficult to ascertain whether the instant stocks are subject to reporting of capital gains tax pursuant to Article 94(1)3 of the Income Tax Act by holding the instant stocks under the Plaintiff’s name. In fact, Plaintiff B reported capital gains tax on the portion of transfer of stocks of two corporations, which meet the requirements of major shareholder solely based on the shares owned under the Plaintiff’s name. In addition, Plaintiff B omitted reporting of capital gains tax on the portion of transfer of stocks of four corporations

D. Determination

1) Determination on the first argument

A) The provision on deemed donation under Article 45-2(1) of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act shall apply in cases where the actual owner and the nominal owner enter into an agreement or communication and make registration, etc. in the name of the nominal owner in the future, regardless of the intent of the nominal owner. As such, the provision on deemed donation under Article 45-2(1) of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act shall apply in cases where the actual owner and the nominal owner enter into a registration, etc. in the name of the nominal owner without regard to the intent of the nominal owner. In this case, the tax authority must prove only that the actual owner is different from the nominal owner, and the verification that the registration, etc. of the nominal owner was made in the unilateral act of the actual owner regardless of the intent of the nominal owner should be made by the nominal owner who asserts it (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 207Du15780, Feb. 14, 208; 201Du24968, Mar. 28, 2013).

[Reference]

B) In the instant case, the Plaintiff B’s shares via each of the instant accounts in the name of the Plaintiff A.

as seen earlier, the actual owner and title of the instant shares are the same as the actual owner of the instant shares.

There is a difference between them.

As to this, Plaintiff B opened each of the accounts of this case by misappropriation of Plaintiff A’s name.

Inasmuch as it is alleged that there is a health stand, part of each of Gap evidence 11 and 26, which seems to correspond thereto.

Some testimonys of Gap, witness S, and E are difficult to believe, and Gap 6 through 10, 13 through 13.

21, 24, 25, 28 through 30 (including each number), each statement alone, shall constitute a false name theft.

In short, there is no other evidence to acknowledge it, and rather, it is found by the above facts of recognition.

In light of the following circumstances, Plaintiff B’s name of this case

There was an explicit or implied agreement for the use of each account for stock transaction;

Therefore, the plaintiffs' above assertion is without merit.

① On October 13, 2005, Plaintiff B opened a securities account in the name of Plaintiff A at the place of origin of H investment securities branch.

At the time, K directly visited the plaintiff A in order to undergo the identification procedure, and at the time, K visited the plaintiff.

J A The name, resident registration number, account password, CD password, written application for a new transaction;

The contact contact address and seal imprint have been affixed. In the above application, the "collaboration Securities Co., Ltd."

Since the term "comprehensive (entrusted) account", "investment purpose", etc., the plaintiff A made a stock transaction.

In spite of having known that it may be used for use, the signature was written without any particular objection.

(c)

② Plaintiff B’s transaction of large-scale shares through each of the instant accounts, and Plaintiff A’s financial office

The plaintiff A was subject to comprehensive taxation, and accordingly, the financial income accrued in May 7, 2011 by the plaintiff A from May 7, 2011

The notice of global income tax return was served.

③ In addition, the name of the Plaintiff A due to a large-scale share transaction through the respective accounts of the Plaintiff B.

As income has rapidly increased, the payment of basic old age pension paid to Plaintiff A was suspended, and Plaintiff was suspended.

The health insurance premium was imposed on A with a significant amount of health insurance premiums. Accordingly, the plaintiff A was the Health Insurance Corporation office.

(1) No person was visited and raised an objection against the notice of a large amount of health insurance premium, on the absence of income.

In addition, the employees at the time asked the Plaintiff A to talk about the shares.

④ On the other hand, on April 10, 2007, Plaintiff B changed the management point of Hinvestment Securities Account to Daegu Branch.

In the application for the correction of customer information written by the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff’s seal imprint affixed thereto, and the Plaintiff B

The limit drawn up at the merchants' branch of Winvestment Securities on September 7, 2009 by opening a securities account under the name of the plaintiff A.

A copy of the plaintiff A's resident registration certificate is attached to the application form for establishment of a unit.

⑤ H Investment Securities Employees S and WInvestment Securities Employees E participating in the opening of each of the accounts in the instant case