beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On April 27, 199, Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant company”) established on April 27, 199 for the purpose of gold-type manufacturing business (hereinafter “the instant company”) issued 40,000 shares of KRW 5,000 (capital 200,000,000) at the time of establishment. The register of shareholders states that C, which participated as promoters at the time of establishment, shall have taken over 32,00 shares (80%) and D (C’s wife), 4,00 shares (10%), the Plaintiff’s 2,00 shares (5%), and E which participated as subscribers, took over 2,00 shares (5%).
B. On December 29, 2001, the instant company issued new shares of 200,000 shares (capital 1,000,000,000 shares). The statement of changes in the shares, etc. include C 160,000 shares, D20, 100 shares, Plaintiff 10,000 shares, and E participating in the share subscription with 10,00 shares each at the time of establishment.
C. The Defendant deemed that the Plaintiff donated each of the above shares from C in accordance with the provision on the donation of title trust property under Article 45-2(1) of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act on the ground that “the Plaintiff received 2,000 shares at the time of establishment of the instant company on April 27, 199, and 10,000 shares at the time of capital increase by issuing new shares on December 29, 201, respectively,” and imposed KRW 1,300,000 on the Plaintiff on August 1, 2013, as gift tax of KRW 1,30,000 and gift tax of KRW 616,324,80 on the gift tax of 201.
(hereinafter “instant disposition”) e.
On October 24, 2013, the Plaintiff filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal on the instant disposition, and received a decision of dismissal on September 12, 2014.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 4, 7 through 9, Eul evidence 1 through 3 (including paper numbers, hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that he received shares of the instant company at the time of the establishment of the instant company is merely for the number of promoters and the number of subscribers required under the Commercial Act.