logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2015.09.15 2015구합63785
취득세등부과처분취소
Text

1. On March 5, 2014, the Defendant imposed acquisition tax of KRW 9,076,660 on the Plaintiff and special rural development tax of KRW 907,650 on the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The register of shareholders of B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C Co., Ltd.”) states that at the time of July 3, 2011, the Plaintiff 23,800 shares (5%) out of the 476,00 shares issued by Nonparty Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Co., Ltd.”) were owned by the Plaintiff, D, 318,920 shares (67%) of the Plaintiff, E, 83,280 shares (17.5%) and F, 50,00 shares (10.5%). The list of changes in shares in the year 2012 stated that the Plaintiff owned 13,280 shares (i.e., the above shares in the name of E and F, 83,280 shares (i.e., 80, 2800 shares, 500 shares, hereinafter “the Plaintiff”).

B. Accordingly, the Defendant: (a) deemed that the Plaintiff acquired the instant shares through the said transfer, and that D related parties thereto, as oligopolistic shareholders, acquired the shares of the said company’s property, such as real estate, at the corresponding ratio pursuant to Article 7(5) of the former Local Tax Act (amended by Act No. 12153, Jan. 1, 2014; hereinafter the same), and imposed and notified the Plaintiff on March 5, 2014, KRW 9,076,660, including penalty tax, and KRW 907,650,650, including penalty tax.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”). C.

On February 27, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an appeal against the instant disposition with the Tax Tribunal, but the said claim was dismissed.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 3 (including additional numbers), Eul evidence 1 to 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The beneficial shareholder of the Plaintiff’s assertion is the Plaintiff, and E and F are merely the shareholders in the form of title trust, who received the above shares from the Plaintiff.

Therefore, the Plaintiff’s entry of the instant shares in the name of E and F is merely the termination of the existing title trust and the restoration of the shareholder’s name.

arrow