It is appropriate to evaluate whether the nominal shares are title trust or transfer of ownership by fraudulent use of name.

It is not sufficient to recognize the fact that the shares in the name are stolen, and the evaluation of unlisted stocks appraised at the price of net profit and loss for three years is legitimate.

Donation of title trust property under Article 41-2 of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

In the first place, the Defendant’s disposition of imposition of KRW 142,302,530 against the Plaintiff on December 15, 2003 is revoked.

Preliminaryly, the part that exceeds 12,133,800 won among the disposition imposing gift tax of 142,302,530 won on the plaintiff on December 15, 2003 shall be revoked.

1. Details of taxation; and

A. On August 1, 1999, Kim○, the father of the Plaintiff, established and operated ○○ General Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “the company of the lawsuit”) and owned 22,500 out of 50,000 shares of the company of the lawsuit under the name of Lee○, his/her wife. On April 10, 200, the Plaintiff transferred 10,000 shares out of 10,00 shares (hereinafter “instant shares”) under the Plaintiff’s name.

B. The Defendant deemed that the Plaintiff, who is the actual owner of the instant shares, was the title trust of the said shares from Kim○○, and recognized that Kim○ donated the instant shares to the Plaintiff on December 15, 2003 by applying Article 41-2 of the former Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act (amended by Act No. 6780, Dec. 18, 2002; hereinafter referred to as the “the deemed donation of title trust property”), and issued the instant disposition imposing and notifying the gift tax amount of KRW 142,30,530, which is calculated on the basis thereof, according to the supplementary assessment methods pursuant to Articles 54 and 56 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act.

【Ground for recognition】 Facts that there is no dispute

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

(1) In the first place, the Plaintiff did not enter into an agreement on the title trust with Kim○-○, or agreed or consented thereto, and the Plaintiff’s entry as a shareholder of the instant shares was a result of misappropriation of the Plaintiff’s name. Therefore, the instant disposition should be revoked in an unlawful manner.

(2) Preliminaryly, it is unreasonable to apply the weighted average method applied to the appraisal of stocks of an unlisted corporation for which three or more years have passed since the commencement of the business in calculating the gift value of the instant stocks, which is an unlisted corporation, even though the business year prior to the appraisal base date is less than five months. Therefore, the assessment of the instant stocks should be calculated by the average value of the presumed interest per share calculated by a separate credit rating agency or accounting corporation, but the average value of the presumed interest per share is less than 11,67 won per share, the gift tax should be calculated on the basis of the net asset value of the instant stocks.

(b) Related statutes;

It is as shown in the attached Form.

C. Determination

(1) Judgment on the assertion of identity theft

Article 41-2 (1) of the Act may not apply where the registration, etc. is unilaterally made irrespective of the intention of the nominal owner. However, in such cases, if the registration, etc. is made unilaterally by the actual owner regardless of the intention of the nominal owner, it shall be proved by the party asserting it (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Du7009, Nov. 12, 2004).

However, the Plaintiff’s statement consistent with the Plaintiff’s assertion is difficult to believe it in light of the following: (a) the Plaintiff’s relationship between the Plaintiff and Kim○○○○; (b) from July 27, 2000 to October 23, 200; (c) from January 7, 2002 to April 7, 2004, as the representative director of ○○ Spanish Co., Ltd. located in the same place of business as each non-party company; (d) the Plaintiff received benefits from the said company; and (e) the Plaintiff did not take any measures to cancel the title trust of the instant shares during the period from the transfer of the title to the closure of the non-party company; and (e) there is no other evidence to acknowledge

(2) Determination as to the assertion about the method of appraisal of shares

However, according to the provisions of Article 54 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act, the value of unlisted stocks as of the base date of appraisal of the stocks of this case is based on net profit and loss (the amount calculated by dividing the weighted average amount of net profit and loss for the last three years by the rate as determined by the Ordinance of the Ministry of Finance and Economy in consideration of the average interest rate formed in the financial market). If the above value falls short of net asset value (the amount calculated by dividing the net asset value of the corporation concerned by the total number of issued and outstanding stocks). The basic rule of the Act provides that net profit and loss per share for less than one year shall be calculated based on the annual net asset value. Accordingly, there is no error in the disposition of this case which assessed the value of the stocks of this case. Accordingly, the average value of the presumption profit per share as alleged by the plaintiff falls within the base date of assessment of gift tax base within the time limit of the gift tax base report, and it is difficult to apply the above provision because the plaintiff did not have any reason to prove that the average value of stocks at the time of this case No. 200 per share was assessed. 1.

3. Conclusion

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