In a case where a wife with a certain occupation and savings performance fails to disclose the source of funds for real estate acquired by him/her, whether it may be presumed that the funds acquired by his/her husband are donated (negative)

If the Plaintiff had a certain occupation and income and had a considerable savings performance over a long-term period, it cannot be presumed that the Plaintiff received real estate from the husband, on the ground that the Plaintiff did not disclose the source of the loan every day while acquiring the real estate.

Article 29-2 of the Inheritance Tax Act

Madden Uniforms

Head of Seocho Tax Office

Seoul High Court Decision 89Gu3627 delivered on December 13, 1989

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

As to the grounds of appeal by Defendant Litigation Performers:

The contents of the judgment of the court below are that the plaintiff has a certain occupation and income and has a considerable amount of savings performance over a long period of time, and that the plaintiff's disposal of real estate did not disclose the source of funds to the plaintiff, so it is impossible to presume the acquisition fund as a donation from the husband immediately, and that there is no evidence to deem that the plaintiff received a donation. Therefore, the judgment of the court below is justified, and there is no violation of the rules of evidence or incomplete deliberation such as the theory of lawsuit. The argument is without merit.

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

Justices Yoon Young-young (Presiding Justice)