Whether the legal fiction provision of Article 32-2 of the former Inheritance Tax Act (amended by Act No. 3744 of Dec. 31, 1981) applies to a simple title trust

The constructive gift of trust property as stipulated in Article 32-2 of the former Inheritance Tax Act (amended by Act No. 3474 of Dec. 31, 1981) shall be deemed to be a trust under the Trust Act as stipulated in Article 1(2) of the Trust Act, since the nominal trust, the title of which only the title of ownership is transferred, shall not be deemed to be a trust under the Trust Act, since the title of which is transferred only is not registered, registered, indicated, or indicated under the provisions of Article 3 of the Trust Act, is not registered or recorded in the securities, or is not entered in the register of shareholders or the register of shareholders, etc.

Article 32-2 of the former Inheritance Tax Act (amended by Act No. 3474 of Dec. 31, 1981)

Supreme Court Decision 83Nu192 delivered on July 26, 1983, 85Nu226 delivered on September 10, 1985

[Defendant-Appellee] Defendant 1 and 3 others (Attorney Song Jin-hun, Counsel for defendant-appellee)

Head of the Cleanness Tax Office

Seoul High Court Decision 85Gu224 delivered on October 28, 1985

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

The legal fiction of trust property under Article 32-2 of the former Inheritance Tax Act (amended by Act No. 3474 of Dec. 31, 1981) is deemed to be a donation of trust property under Article 1(2) of the Trust Act, since the truster is deemed to have made a donation of the trust property to the trustee on the date of the relevant registration, the so-called title trust, the title of which only the title of ownership is transferred, cannot be deemed to be a trust under Article 3 of the Trust Act because it did not make a registration, registration, indication, or entry under Article 3 of the Trust Act (Supreme Court Decision 83Nu192 Decided July 26, 1983; Supreme Court Decision 85Nu266 Decided September 10, 1985, etc.).

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below recognized that the Plaintiff’s acquisition of the shares of this case was not a donation from the Nonparty, but merely a title trust in the front of the Plaintiff, and held that the disposition imposing the gift tax of this case is unlawful on the ground that this cannot be deemed as a donation pursuant to the above former Inheritance Tax Act.

In light of the records, the fact-finding and judgment of the court below are just and there is no error of law by misunderstanding the legal principles or by misunderstanding the rules of evidence.

In addition, even if the plaintiff attended the general meeting of shareholders and exercised share certificates as a title trustee of shares, this is merely a case where a person who is not a shareholder attends the general meeting of shareholders, so it cannot be viewed as a deemed donation of trust property.

The judgment of party members pointing out by appellant (70Nu22, March 31, 1970) is not appropriate since the real estate based on Article 34-4 of the Inheritance Tax Act prior to the amendment by Act No. 2691, Dec. 21, 1974 is related to the interpretation of title trust. The assertion is groundless.

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

Justices O Sung-sung (Presiding Justice)