Seocho 208west 1154 (Law No. 13, 2008)

The adequacy of the disposition of the value of the sales apartment at the market price of donated assets

The apartment sales case is located in the same Dong even though the number of floors is different compared to the apartment house, and the area, use, and items are identical, the standard market price is lower than the apartment house, and the gift was made within three months after the sale of the apartment and there was no rapid change in the price, and the taxation disposition is legitimate.

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

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

The Defendant’s disposition of imposition of gift tax of KRW 55,803,380 against the Plaintiff on January 2, 2008 shall be revoked.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On July 4, 2006, the Plaintiff donated ○○○○○○○○-dong 411, 105 Dong 1204 (area 114.96 square meters; hereinafter “the instant apartment”).

B. On September 28, 2006, the Plaintiff declared and paid KRW 2,200,000 calculated by adding the gift tax base of KRW 352,00,000 (standard market price publicly notified by the Minister of Construction and Transportation), debt 300,000,000, and gift tax base of KRW 52,00,000, when filing a gift tax on the instant apartment.

C. On July 4, 2006, the date of donation of the apartment of this case, the Defendant investigated the trading cases for three months before and after July 4, 2006, and corrected and notified the Plaintiff of KRW 580,803,380,00, which is the trading price of the apartment of this case, on January 2, 2008, by stating that the same Dong as the apartment of this case and the area of the same ○○○ apartment of 302 (hereinafter referred to as the “sale apartment”) was traded at KRW 580,00,000 (hereinafter referred to as the “sale apartment of this case”).

D. The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an appeal on March 31, 2008, but the Tax Tribunal dismissed it on June 13, 2008.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1-2, Gap evidence 3, Eul evidence 1-2 and arguments

The purport of the whole

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

In calculating the value of the taxable object, which is the tax base of gift tax, the disposition of this case is unlawful in violation of the principle of no taxation without law, because it is detrimental to the predictability of taxpayers and is detrimental to legal stability.

(b) Related statutes;

It is as shown in the attached Table related statutes.

C. Determination

Article 60 (1) of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act provides that the value of donated property shall, in principle, be the market price as of the date of donation, and Article 60 (2) of the same Act provides that "the market price under paragraph (1) of the same Article shall include "the value which is recognized as the market price under the conditions as prescribed by Presidential Decree, such as the number of available and public auction prices and appraisal prices, in addition to the value which is recognized as

Article 49 of the Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act enacted by delegation of the above provision provides that the criteria for market price calculation shall be extended to assets other than the pertinent property, while the price formed with respect to the other property shall be equivalent to the market price of the pertinent property, the identity of the size, location, purpose and category of the two property, and the closeness of the time of the transaction (the sale and purchase of other property shall be conducted before and after three months from the evaluation date).

In full view of the purport of the entire argument in Eul evidence No. 1, the location, area, donation and sale date, transaction amount, and standard market price of the apartment of this case and the apartment of this case can be acknowledged as follows.

Classification

Dong, Number of Units

Area of a square meter;

The date of donation/trade

Amount of transaction ( won)

Standard market price (won)

As of April 28, 2006

The apartment of this case

105, 1204

114.96

June 28, 2006

416,000,000

Apartment houses for sale cases

105, 302

114.96

May 9, 2006

580,000,000

354.00,000

In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the above facts, even though the number of floors is different from that of the apartment of this case, the apartment of this case is located in the same Dong, and its use and item are identical, the standard market price of the apartment of this case at the time of the donation of this case (354,00,000) is lower than the standard market price of the apartment of this case (416,000,000), the apartment of this case was donated within three months after the transaction of the apartment of this case, and it cannot be seen that there was a sudden change in the price of the apartment of this case. In light of the above facts, the defendant's disposal of this case by deeming the transaction amount of the apartment of this case to be the market price of the apartment of this case is legitimate as it is in accordance with Article 60 (1) and (2) of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act and Article 49 (1) and (5) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act.

Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion is without merit.

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.