The case reversing the judgment of the court below that there was an error of calculating the market price of unlisted stocks through objectivity and rationality;

The method of Article 5 (5) 1 (b) of the Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax Act on the Evaluation of Market Price of Non-listed Stocks is reasonable if the average net profit for the last three years is not visible. However, if a corporation pays the net profit for 1,602 won in 1979, 06 won in 1980, 1,177 won in 1980, and 26 won in 1981, it is a common example that the market price of stocks falls rapidly in 1981, if the corporation incurred losses before 72 won in 1981, it is the method of calculating the average profits and losses for three years including the market price of stocks in the year when the stock price falls rapidly in 1981.

Article 16-2 of the former Enforcement Rule of the Corporate Tax Act (amended by Ordinance of the Ministry of Finance and Economy No. 1418 of Feb. 9, 1980), Article 5 of the Enforcement Decree of

International Fire Insurance Co., Ltd., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant

The director of the tax office

Seoul High Court Decision 84Gu661 delivered on June 24, 1985

The judgment below is reversed and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

The grounds of appeal by the Plaintiff (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed) are examined.

The judgment of the court below is that the plaintiff owned 22,50 shares out of 330,00 shares issued by the non-party foreign currency promotion company and transferred 30,000 shares in September 18, 1981; 30,000 shares in September 25, 198; 60,000 shares in the same year; 120,000 shares in the non-party company's face value at 10,000 shares in the non-party company; the plaintiff and the non-party company have a special relationship under Article 20 of the Corporate Tax Act and Article 46 (1) of the Enforcement Decree thereof; and the market price at the time of the transfer of shares at 15,054 won per share to reduce the tax burden at 15,000 shares; and the defendant imposes corporate tax and defense tax seeking the revocation of the transfer.

이 사건에서 원고가 주장하는 바를 요약하면 아래와 같다. 원고가 1981.4.15 재무부장관으로부터 원고소유의 위 주식에 대한 처분지시를 받았는데 동 지시를 따르지 아니하면 원고가 매입을 추진하던 소외 국제종합금융에 대한 주식매입 승인이 거부되고 원고에 대한 보험사업허가의 전부 또는 일부가 취소될 급박한 상황하에서 위 주식을 처분하여야 할 형편에 있었는 바, 처분되어야 할 주식이 액면가액만 해도 12억원에 이르나 위 주식이 총발행주식중 36퍼센트에 지나지 아니하여 소외 회사에 대한 경영권을 지배할 수 있는 지주율에 미치지 못하여 원매자를 찾을 수 없었으며 소외 회사는 그 소유건물인 국제보험빌딩의 임대업을 목적으로 설립되어 위 빌딩을 도뀨호텔에 임대하여 왔으나 호텔영업부진으로 위 호텔을 폐업하고 그 시설을 철거할 예정이었는데 그 비용이 12억원을 넘어 주식시가가 하락세에 있어 소외 회사가 주식을 매입 소각할 수 밖에 없는 처지였고 위 주식을 양도할 무렵 소외 회사의 주식이 1주당 금 9,000원 또는 금 10,000원에 거래된 사례가 있음에 비추어 위 주식의 양도는 경제인으로서의 합리적인 행위이었으며 법인세법시행규칙(1980.2.9 재무부령 제1418호) 제16조의 2 에 의하여 상속세법시행령 제5조 를 준용하여 평가한 주식평가액을 시가로 삼을 수 없다는 것이다. 이에 대하여 원심은 원고가 재무부장관으로부터 원고소유의 소외 회사 주식에 대한 매각지시를 받고 이 사건 주식을 양도한 후에 소외 국제종합금융의 주식매입을 허가받은 사실은 인정되나 재무부장관의 지시가 시가보다 현저하게 저렴한 가격으로라도 양도하도록 강요한 것이라고 볼 수 없으며 원고가 위 지시를 즉시 이행하지 아니함으로써 보험업무의 취소를 받을 절박한 처지에 있었다고 인정할 수 없고 도뀨호텔의 폐업시기가 1982.9.30경으로 위 주식양도일로부터 1년후이며 위 호텔이 폐업하여도 빌딩의 경제적 효용성은 그대로 남기 때문에 그러한 사정이 소외회사의 주식시가에 미치는 영향은 그다지 크지 않았으리라 엿보이고 그러한 사정은 주당순이익 계산명세를 보아도 알 수 있으며 위 법인세법시행규칙에 의하여 준용되는 상속세법시행령상의 주식시가 평가방법이 합리적이라고 판단하면서 주식의 양도가 부당행위에 해당한다는 피고의 주장을 지지하였다.

The wrongful calculation system is a system that denies the tax burden on the corporation's income if it is acknowledged that the above act of transfer of shares constitutes an unfair act, contrary to social norms, because it unfairly reduces corporate tax by performing an act which is an improper act which is a policeman with no special relation. However, the major ground for the lower court to determine that the act of transfer of shares by the Plaintiff constitutes an unfair act is that it is a statement of calculation of net income per share (No. 16). This is that the Defendant calculated the market price of shares of the non-party company which is an unlisted corporation by applying mutatis mutandis Article 5 (5) 1 (b) of the Enforcement Decree of the Corporate Tax Act to calculate the market price of the above non-party company's stock price for the last 6 years. However, it cannot be said that the above provision of the Enforcement Rule of the Corporate Tax Act provides that the market price of the non-party company should be calculated by applying mutatis mutandis the above 7-year net profit per share for the first time to calculate the market price of the above 9-year net profit per share.

Furthermore, the court below determined that the appraisal value according to the above appraisal method was not a significant impact on the market price of the shares without denying the fact that the shares were traded in the amount of KRW 9,00 or KRW 10,000 per share before and after the transfer of the shares in this case, and that the statement of KRW 15,16 per share, each statement of KRW 15,00 or KRW 10,000 per share of the witness, and each testimony of the highest and tear iron shall be rejected, and that the amount exceeding 1/3 of the capital is required for the cost of removal and recovery of the building that the non-party company, which is the capital of KRW 330,00,000, which can be said to be almost all of its owned assets within 1,200, is contrary to the rule of experience, and such determination is not a result of an erroneous determination of the value of

Therefore, without further proceeding to decide on other grounds of appeal, the judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Seoul High Court. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Park Jong-soo (Presiding Justice)