Incheon District Court 2008Guhap3900 (No. 28, 2009)

early 208 Heavy1222 (208.07.07)

The number of buildings and floors of apartments is different, but where the standard market price is the same, the market price;

In full view of the fact that the apartment and the Dong and the number of floors are different, but the area, etc. are the same as the residential apartment in the same complex, the standard market price is similar, and there was no sudden change in the general trading price during three months before and after the donation, the defendant can be deemed to have similar to the apartment of this case, the area, location, and use of the apartment

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

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked, and KRW 50,466,240,00,000,000,000 against the plaintiff on January 8, 2008 by the defendant

The imposition disposition shall be revoked.

1. Part to accept a judgment of the first instance;

The reason why this court's explanation concerning this case is that the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act (the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act prior to the amendment by Act No. 8852, Feb. 29, 2008; hereinafter referred to as "the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act") provides that the inheritance tax and Gift Tax Act (the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act prior to the amendment by Act No. 8852, Feb. 29, 2008; hereinafter referred to as "the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act") shall be revised to "1302, No. 1302, No. 6, No. 4, No. 1301, and the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act shall be revised to "No. 1301, No. 4, Dec. 20, 2008; hereinafter referred to as "No. 8852, Feb. 29, 2008") shall be added to the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act, and it shall be cited as it is by Article 8 (2) of the Civil Litigation Act.

The main sentence of Article 60 (1) of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act provides that the value of property on which inheritance tax or gift tax is levied shall be the market value as of the date of commencing the inheritance or the date of donation (hereinafter referred to as the "date of appraisal"), and Paragraph (2) of the same Article provides that the market value under subparagraph (1) shall be the value which is generally recognized as normal in cases of free transactions between many and unspecified persons and which is recognized as the market value under conditions prescribed by Presidential Decree, such as the expropriation, public sale price, appraisal price, and appraisal price. The main sentence of Article 49 (1) of the Enforcement Decree provides that "in cases of sale, appraisal, expropriation, auction, or public sale within six months before and after the base date of appraisal (three months in cases of donated property), the value of the property in question shall be deemed as the market value under the provisions of each of the following subparagraphs in cases of sale, appraisal, expropriation, or public sale, and the value of the property in question shall be deemed as the average value of the property in question under subparagraph 2; in cases of paragraph (1) of the same paragraph (2).

As above, Article 60 of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act declares the principle of provisional taxation at the time of the evaluation of inherited or donated property under paragraph (1) of this Article. Paragraph (2) of this Article provides for the alternative criteria that can be recognized as the market price on the premise that the market price is formed under the general and normal transaction, and that the objective exchange value should be adequately reflected, and delegates its specific scope to the Presidential Decree. The provision on the transaction value, etc. of the "relevant property" subject to taxation under each subparagraph of Article 49(1) of the Enforcement Decree delegated by it is an example of representative cases that can be seen as the market price of inherited or donated property (see Supreme Court Decision 2000Du5098, Aug. 21, 200). Since Article 60(2) of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act does not limit only to the market price of the "relevant property" subject to taxation, it does not constitute a violation of Article 60(2) of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act’s provision of comparative taxation or a limited scope of the market price.

Therefore, this part of the plaintiff's assertion is without merit.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.