early 2012west 4288 ( December 31, 2012)

"The political funds that are subject to gift tax, such as the content of the criminal judgment";

It is difficult to recognize special circumstances that it is difficult to adopt a judgment based on the evidence submitted alone, because the criminal judgment that received political funds as a political fund by means not prescribed by the Acts related to political funds becomes final and conclusive, and it is difficult to accept

2013Guhap52377 Revocation of Disposition of Imposition of Gift Tax

GongAAA

Samsung Head of Samsung Tax Office

June 28, 2013

July 19, 2013

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The disposition of imposition of KRW 000 on the aggregate of the gift tax stated in the "amount of gift tax" column in the attached disposition statement that the Defendant rendered to the Plaintiff on July 1, 2012 shall be revoked.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On July 1, 2012, the Defendant imposed a gift tax of KRW 000 on the Plaintiff on the ground that “the Plaintiff was donated “political funds other than political funds” under Article 76(3) of the Restriction on Special Taxation Act (amended by Act No. 9921, Jan. 1, 2010; hereinafter the same) according to the Seoul High Court Decision (201No1706).

B. The Plaintiff dissatisfied with this and tried on September 27, 2012. On December 31, 2012, 2012, the Plaintiff was determined to re-examine the donor with regard to the imposition of KRW 18,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00,000,00,000,00,00,00,00,00,00,00,00,00,00,00,00,00,000,000 won, and, accordingly, it was determined to correct each tax base and tax according to the result, and dismiss the remainder of the claim.

". Accordingly, according to the decision, the defendant changed part of the donor as stated in the column of "the donor in the attached disposition statement" to the plaintiff on January 15, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as "the disposition of this case where the disposition of imposition of the gift tax by the plaintiff on July 1, 2012 reduced)." (The grounds for recognition) The facts that there is no dispute, and the entries in Gap 1, 3, 1, 3, 3, 4, 6, and 7 (including natural disaster subparagraph (a), respectively), and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The expenditure of “OOO(hereinafter “OO”) was attributed to OO or OOO for a corporation, which is an incorporated association, and paid benefits to BBBland (hereinafter “BBBland”) to OO, a driver of the vehicle of the BaO, the Plaintiff’s wife, and the Plaintiff used only 000 won to the Plaintiff through OO, and thus, the excess amount was attributed to the OO. Accordingly, the instant disposition that was imposed on the gift tax was unlawful.”

It is as shown in the attached Table related statutes.

(c) Fact of recognition;

"(1) On June 11, 2010, the Plaintiff was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years for a period of eight years for a violation of the Political Funds Act, and the Plaintiff appealed against the Seoul High Court (2010No1706) on December 20, 2010, in collusion with MaOO to receive KRW 000, and KRW 000, and KRW 000 from BBW and BBland, and KRW 000 from OOO as political funds, and was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years for a period of eight years for a violation of the Political Funds Act." (2) The Plaintiff appealed against the judgment, and was sentenced to a dismissal of appeal from the Seoul High Court (2010No1706) on December 20, 2010.

[Based on Recognition] The facts without dispute, Eul 3 and 4, and the whole purport of the pleading

D. Determination

(1) Unless there are special circumstances to deem that the relevant criminal judgment has become final and conclusive in the administrative litigation, and that it is difficult to adopt a factual judgment of that criminal judgment, the fact of violation cannot be recognized (see Supreme Court Decision 98Du10424, Nov. 26, 199).

(2) The judgment of a criminal case was finalized that the plaintiff received 000 won as political funds in a way not stipulated in the "Act on Political Funds by KimO, etc.", and each description of Gap evidence Nos. 5 through 15 (including paper numbers) is insufficient to recognize special circumstances that make it difficult to adopt a judgment, and there is no other evidence to recognize it. Therefore, it is reasonable to deem that 000 won constitutes "political funds subject to gift tax under Article 76 (3) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Restriction on Special Cases concerning Municipal Ordinances" and it was reverted to the plaintiff, and the disposition of this case is legitimate.

If so, the plaintiff's claim is without merit, it is dismissed, and it is so decided as per Disposition.