Seoul High Court-2016-Nu-63790 ( April 19, 2017)

The provisions for major shareholders under Article 94 (1) 3 of the Income Tax Act and Article 157 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act do not violate the Constitution.

(2) In light of the fact that the Constitutional Court's jurisdiction over the constitutionality of statutes exceeds the scope of a request for a tax trial, the disposition that the disposition agency notified of the decision as declared after the deadline of the plaintiff is not erroneous.

Article 94 of the Income Tax Act

Supreme Court Decision 2017Du45421 Decided revocation of imposition of capital gains tax

Doese 00 4

00 Other 1

Seoul High Court 2016Nu63790 Revocation of Disposition imposing capital gains tax

2017.09.14

All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

All of the judgment of the court below and the records of this case were examined, but the appellant's grounds of appeal are not included in the grounds provided by each subparagraph of Article 4 (1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure of Appeal or are recognized to be groundless. Thus, all of the appeals are dismissed pursuant to Article 5 of the same Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent