If no objection is raised within the appeal period, the imposition of the original gift tax is confirmed to be legitimate.

If no objection is raised within the period of appeal against the imposition of the gift tax, the imposition of the original gift tax shall be confirmed to be legitimate, and it shall be reasonable to deem that the effect of the previous determination does not affect the validity of the disposition of this case solely on the ground that the Anti-Corruption

2012Return of unjust enrichment by 24600

ThisAAA

Korea

March 20, 2013

May 10, 2013

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 000 won with 5% per annum from May 7, 2010 to the service date of a copy of the complaint of this case, and 20% per annum from the next day to the day of complete payment.

1. Basic facts

가. 원고의 부(父) 이BBB는 2008. 6. 30. 원고에게 경북 성주군 성주읍 OO리 0000답 2473㎡， 같은 리 2131 답 3868.9㎡' 같은 리 000 답 290B.4㎡(이하 '이 사건 농지 ' 라고 한다)를 증여하고 이를 원인으로 하여 원고 명의로 소유권이전등기를 마쳐주었다.

B. On November 30, 200B, the Plaintiff filed an application for reduction or exemption of gift tax by applying Article 71(1) of the former Restriction of Special Taxation Act (amended by Act No. 9921, Jan. 1, 2010; hereinafter the same) while filing a report on gift tax pursuant to the gift of the farmland in this case, and the Defendant rejected the application for reduction or exemption on the ground that the Plaintiff did not report the gift tax until September 30, 2008, which is the deadline for filing the gift tax, and issued a disposition imposing KRW 00 on the Plaintiff (hereinafter the “instant disposition”).

C. The Plaintiff paid KRW 000 on March 30, 2010, and KRW 000 on April 2, 2010, and KRW 000 on May 6, 2010 (including surcharges) as gift tax.

(d) the relevant provisions;

Paper in the Appendix

[Reasons for Recognition] The whole purport of the pleading, as described in the facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2, 3, and Eul evidence 2, 3, and 6

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The assertion

The plaintiff, and the reason why the donation of the farmland of this case satisfies the requirements for gift tax reduction and exemption as prescribed by the above law is just because the plaintiff made an application for tax reduction and exemption of gift tax with the statutory deadline for return due to the lack of law, and the disposition of this case except for the exemption from gift tax reduction and exemption should be revoked. Therefore, the defendant asserts that there is a duty to return unjust enrichment equivalent to the gift tax paid by the plaintiff.

B. Determination

According to the records and arguments in Eul, Eul evidence No. 4, and the whole purport of the pleading, and the plaintiff on June 16, 2009.

On June 16, 2009, the notice of the disposition of this case can be recognized as being served with the notice of this case. Accordingly, the plaintiff was aware of the disposition of this case on June 16, 2009. Since the plaintiff did not take the appeal procedures provided for in Articles 55 and 56 of the Framework Act on National Taxes until September 15, 2009, the validity of the disposition of this case becomes final and conclusive. On the ground that the plaintiff filed a request with the Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission to seek cancellation of the disposition of this case, such as the plaintiff's assertion, and the plaintiff presented opinion that it is desirable for the Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission to cancel the disposition of this case" around December 7, 2009, it is reasonable to view that the validity of the disposition of this case does not affect the validity of the already finalized disposition of this case. In addition, unless there is any other assertion or evidence related to the validity of the disposition of this case, the plaintiff's payment of gift

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.