Appropriateness of the disposition deemed as gift of profits accrued from the cultivation of forfeited shares

In the event of a person with the reason for the non-listed corporation, the valuation of the value per share of the shares of this case at the time of the enforcement of the assessment shall be subject to the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act, taking into account such fact.

The contents of the decision shall be the same as attached.

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed. 2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiff.

1. Details of the instant disposition;

갑 제1호증의 1,2, 갑 제2호증, 을 제1호증의 1,2, 을 제2호증의 1 내지 3, 을 제3호증의 1 내지 8, 을 제6호증의 각 기재와 증인 정ㅇㅇ의 증언에 변론의 전취지를 종합하면, 다음의 사실을 인정할 수 있고 달리 이에 반하는 증거가 없다.

가. 소외 주식회사 ㅇㅇ장식은 1985. 7. 3. 자본금 50,000,000원(1주당 액면 금5,000원인 주식 10,000주)으로 설립된 회사인데, 원고는 소외회사의 설립시부터 그 주식의 5퍼센트를 보유하고 있었고, 그 이후 소외회사가 1990. 5. 4. 자본금 50,000,000원을 금200,000,000원으로 증자할 때 원고의 주식지분율 5퍼센트에 대하여 배정된 신주 750주를 인수함과 동시에 소외 남ㅇㅇ(원고의 4촌형수)가 인수포기한 1,166주와 소외 한ㅇㅇ(원고의 매부)이 인수포기한 166주(위 1,166주와 166주를 이 사건 주식이라 한다)를 함께 인수하였다.

나. 이에 피고는 구 상속세법 제34조의 4 , 같은법 시행령 제41조의 3 에 의하여 원고가 특수관계에 있는 자들인 위 남ㅇㅇ, 한ㅇㅇ로부터 그들이 인수포기한 주식을 증여받은 것으로 보고 증여일 현재 1주당가액을 같은법 시행령 제5조제5항제1호 나목 및 같은법 기본통칙 109…34의 4 제3항 소정의 산식에 따라 금91,401원으로 평가한 다음 그 평가액과 1주당 납입금액 10,000원과의 차액 금81,401원을 1주당 증여가액으로 보아 1994. 1. 16. 원고에게 위 남ㅇㅇ 증여분 증여세 금33,350,910원, 방위세 금5,558,480원과 위 한ㅇㅇ 증여분 증여세 금2,221,810원, 방위세 금370,300원을 부과,고지(이하 이 사건 부과처분이라 한다)하였다.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The parties' assertion

The defendant asserts that the disposition of this case is lawful on the ground of relevant laws and regulations. The plaintiff's acquisition of each of the above shares is not a change in the value of assets, but a change in profit value of the non-listed company at the time of acquisition of each of the above shares. However, Article 5 (5) 1 (b) of the Enforcement Decree of the above Act is a provision that evaluates the value of the non-listed company at a certain point of time, and Article 5 (5) 1 (b) of the above Enforcement Decree is not a provision on the method of assessing the value of the non-listed company's new shares after the consideration of the value of the non-listed corporation at a certain point of time, but a provision of Article 109-34-4 (3) of the above general rule is merely a provision on the method of internal business affairs of the defendant, and the above provision is based on the premise that there is no change in the value of assets of the non-listed corporation as of the increase in the value of assets at the time of capital increase of the non-listed company's acquisition of stocks at least the value of the non-listed company.

(b) Related statutes;

The main sentence of Article 34-4 of the former Inheritance Tax Act (amended by Act No. 4283, Dec. 31, 1990) provides that except for the cases of Articles 32 through 34-3, a person who obtains profits as prescribed by the Presidential Decree shall be deemed to have received such profits as a donation at the time of receiving the corresponding profits. The former Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 13196, Dec. 31, 1990) provides that the profits as prescribed by the Presidential Decree under Article 41-3 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax Act (amended by the Presidential Decree No. 13196, Dec. 31, 1990) shall include the difference between the value of new stocks paid in excess and that of the donation date of the corporation pursuant to the provisions of Articles 5 through 7 on the basis of the common provisions of subparagraph 1 of Article 34-4 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax Act, in order to increase the amount of capital investment.

C. Determination

Article 41-3 of the Enforcement Decree of the above Act, which had been enforced at the time of the Plaintiff’s acquisition of the shares, means the difference between the amount of new shares paid in excess and the value assessed pursuant to Articles 5 through 7 on the basis of the current status of donation date in cases where a shareholder of the pertinent corporation renounces his right to receive new shares in order to increase the amount of capital investment by the corporation, and a person who has a special relationship with the shareholders, etc. who given up his right to receive new shares has given up his right to receive new shares in excess of their share ratio, so that the value per share should be assessed according to Article 5 of the above Enforcement Decree of the above Act. Since Article 5 (5) 1 (b) of the above Enforcement Decree of the above Act provides that the value per share of the above non-listed corporation shall be assessed by calculating the arithmetic mean of the value of assets and profits per share of the above non-listed corporation under Article 34-4 of the above Enforcement Decree of the above Act, it shall not be deemed that there is no change in the value of shares before issuance of new shares.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case seeking revocation of the disposition on the premise that the disposition of this case is illegal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.