Open Decision Ledger · Tax & international taxation
Deemed acquisition tax on a majority shareholder and actual control
Supreme Court, Mar. 28, 2019, 2015Du3591 (judgment)
Case name: 지방세부과(예정)처분취소[간주취득세를 부담하는 과점주주인지 여부가 문제된 사건]
Official text on the National Law Information Center
Question
Does a person who is entered in the share register as having acquired shares making him a majority shareholder under Article 105(6), first sentence, of the former Local Tax Act owe deemed acquisition tax, if he could not in substance exercise the rights in those shares so as to control the corporation's operation?
Holding
No. Article 105(6), first sentence, of the former Local Tax Act must be read restrictively, because charging deemed acquisition tax on the same taxable object again, after the corporation has already borne acquisition tax, may amount to double taxation; the tax reaches only a majority shareholder who can in substance control the corporation's operation by exercising shareholder rights such as voting rights. A majority shareholder means a person whose combined shareholding with the persons in special relationship to him exceeds 50 per cent of the corporation's total issued shares and who exercises the rights in those shares in substance. Even where the share register records the acquisition, a person who could not in substance exercise those rights and control the operation owes no deemed acquisition tax.
Summary of the holding, verbatim
따라서 주주명부에 과점주주에 해당하는 주식을 취득한 것으로 기재되었다고 하더라도 주식에 관한 권리를 실질적으로 행사하여 법인의 운영을 지배할 수 없었던 경우에는 간주취득세를 낼 의무를 지지 않는다고 보아야 한다.
Unofficial English translation
Therefore, even where the shareholder registry records the acquisition of shares corresponding to a controlling shareholder, if such person could not substantially exercise rights pertaining to the shares so as to control the operation of the corporation, it must be regarded that such person is not liable to pay the deemed acquisition tax.
Disposition
Dismissed Stated in the decision
상고를 기각한다. 상고비용은 피고가 부담한다.
Unofficial English translation
The appeal is dismissed. The costs of the final appeal shall be borne by the defendant.
Form of the test
Elements stated Stated in the decision
모든 과점주주에게 간주취득세를 부과해서는 안 되고 의결권 등을 통하여 주주권을 실질적으로 행사하여 법인의 운영을 사실상 지배할 수 있는 과점주주에게만 간주취득세를 부과하는 것으로 위 조항을 제한적으로 해석하여야 한다
Unofficial English translation
the deemed acquisition tax must not be imposed on all controlling shareholders, but must be imposed only on controlling shareholders who can substantially exercise shareholder rights through voting rights and the like so as to effectively control the operation of the corporation, and the aforesaid provision must be restrictively interpreted
Factors
- 주주 1명과 그의 특수관계인 중 대통령령으로 정하는 자의 소유주식의 합계가 해당 법인의 발행주식 총수의 100분의 50을 초과하면서
- 그에 관한 권리를 실질적으로 행사하는 자를 말한다
- 이미 해당 법인이 취득세를 부담하였는데 과점주주에 대하여 다시 동일한 과세물건을 대상으로 간주취득세를 부과하는 것은 이중과세에 해당할 수 있기 때문에
- 의결권 등을 통하여 주주권을 실질적으로 행사하여 법인의 운영을 사실상 지배할 수 있는 과점주주에게만 간주취득세를 부과하는 것으로
- 주식에 관한 권리를 실질적으로 행사하여 법인의 운영을 지배할 수 없었던 경우에는 간주취득세를 낼 의무를 지지 않는다고 보아야 한다
Unofficial English translation
• where the sum of the shares owned by one shareholder and the persons falling within the class prescribed by Presidential Decree among his or her specially related persons exceeds 50/100 of the total number of issued shares of the corporation, and
• means a person who substantially exercises rights pertaining thereto
• since the corporation in question has already borne the acquisition tax, imposing the deemed acquisition tax on a controlling shareholder again with respect to the same object of taxation may constitute double taxation,
• imposing the deemed acquisition tax only on controlling shareholders who can substantially exercise shareholder rights through voting rights and the like so as to effectively control the operation of the corporation,
• if such person could not substantially exercise rights pertaining to the shares so as to control the operation of the corporation, it must be regarded that such person is not liable to pay the deemed acquisition tax.
Relation to precedent
States a new standard Read from the decision
그러나 이미 해당 법인이 취득세를 부담하였는데 과점주주에 대하여 다시 동일한 과세물건을 대상으로 간주취득세를 부과하는 것은 이중과세에 해당할 수 있기 때문에
Unofficial English translation
However, since the corporation in question has already borne the acquisition tax, imposing the deemed acquisition tax on a controlling shareholder again with respect to the same object of taxation may constitute double taxation,
Decisions referred to
해당 본문 참조
Burden of proof
Not addressed Not in the decision
Open question and revisit condition
If the name-holder takes part in a general meeting or exercises a vote once during the period of entry, does he still fall outside deemed acquisition tax because he could not control the operation?
A later decision applying Article 46(ii) or Article 7(5) of the Local Tax Basic Act to a comparable nominee arrangement would call for this entry to be read again. So would a finding that the name-holder's inability to exercise the rights was not accepted below, since this entry rests on the appellate record as the Supreme Court described it.
Cross-family AI independent reading & axis check
7 of 8 axes matched GPT-6 Astra (OpenAI, codex CLI) · 2026-10-25
A reader from another model family (GPT-6 Astra), given the official text but not the primary reading, agreed on 7 of the 8 axes; the readings differed on axis 6 (relation to precedent).
Axis 6 (Relation to precedent): Primary “States a new standard” vs Independent “Cannot be determined”
The primary reading treats the holding as setting a new standard that a registered holder is not liable without actual control, while the independent reading leaves the precedent relationship unverified. The two readings differ on whether the court departed from earlier law.
그러나 이미 해당 법인이 취득세를 부담하였는데 과점주주에 대하여 다시 동일한 과세물건을 대상으로 간주취득세를 부과하는 것은 이중과세에 해당할 수 있기 때문에Raw responses and comparison record: Protocol · Blind readings (JSONL) · Axis comparison (JSONL) · SHA-256 (JSON)
Lower-court contrast & scope of application
Lower-court reading vs. Supreme Court holding
Lower-court context: The Seoul High Court, in its judgment of 26 August 2015 (2014Nu8065), held that the plaintiff did not become a majority shareholder bearing deemed acquisition tax merely by taking an assignment of the shares held by Outsider 1 and Outsider 2 and having the register changed in his name, and that the assessment made on that premise was therefore unlawful.
Supreme Court standard: The Supreme Court found no error. It held that the plaintiff's taking of the shares in his own name, without any intention to exercise shareholder rights and at STXConstruction's request, was a reading of the case as a temporary entry in the register so that the name could be transferred on at once, and that he was in no position to exercise the shareholder rights against STXConstruction's will during the six days before he transferred all the shares to STXConstruction on 24 December 2009. Because the court below had reached the same conclusion, the appeal of the defendant, who had assessed acquisition tax of KRW 484,534,690 and rural and fishery special tax of KRW 48,453,450, totalling KRW 532,988,140, on the construction land valued at KRW 16,248,648,830, was dismissed by unanimous opinion.
Distinguishing conditions
- A shareholder whose combined holding exceeds 50 per cent of the issued shares and who in substance exercises the rights in those shares, so that he can control the corporation's operation.
- A name-holder who could exercise the shareholder rights against the will of the party requesting the entry, since the Court relied on his inability to do so during the six days in question.
- A transfer of shares to a party other than the one that asked for the temporary entry in the plaintiff's name, since the Court relied on the immediate onward transfer to STXConstruction.
Record verification notes
Trace the whole chain of the share transfer: who asked for the entry in the plaintiff's name, on what terms, what the price per share was, and how many days passed before the onward transfer. Then check what the plaintiff could actually do with the shares in that period, since the holding turns on his inability to exercise the shareholder rights against STXConstruction's will. Finally, confirm which version of the Local Tax Act or of the Local Tax Basic Act governs the assessment.
From the official text
Points at issue
구 지방세법 제105조 제6항 전문에서 정한 과점주주 간주취득세에서 ‘과점주주’의 의미 및 주주명부에 과점주주에 해당하는 주식을 취득한 것으로 기재되었다고 하더라도 주식에 관한 권리를 실질적으로 행사하여 법인의 운영을 지배할 수 없었던 경우 간주취득세를 낼 의무를 지는지 여부(소극)
Unofficial English translation
The meaning of 'controlling shareholder' in the deemed acquisition tax on controlling shareholders provided in the main text of Article 105, paragraph (6) of the former Local Tax Act, and whether a person is liable to pay the deemed acquisition tax even where, although the shareholder registry records the acquisition of shares corresponding to a controlling shareholder, such person could not substantially exercise rights pertaining to the shares so as to control the operation of the corporation (negative)
Summary of the holding
구 지방세법(2010. 3. 31. 법률 제10221호로 전부 개정되기 전의 것, 이하 같다) 제105조 제6항 전문은 과점주주의 간주취득세에 관하여 ‘법인의 주식을 취득함으로써 과점주주가 되었을 때에는 그 과점주주가 해당 법인의 부동산 등을 취득한 것으로 본다.’고 정하고 있다. 여기에서 과점주주란 구 지방세법 제22조 제2호에 정한 바와 같이 주주 1명과 그의 특수관계인 중 대통령령으로 정하는 자의 소유주식의 합계가 해당 법인의 발행주식 총수의 100분의 50을 초과하면서 그에 관한 권리를 실질적으로 행사하는 자를 말한다. 과점주주는 해당 법인의 재산을 사실상 임의처분하거나 관리·운용할 수 있는 지위에 있게 되어 실질적으로 그 재산을 직접 소유하는 것과 다르지 않다고 보아 위와 같은 조항을 둔 것이다. 그러나 이미 해당 법인이 취득세를 부담하였는데 과점주주에 대하여 다시 동일한 과세물건을 대상으로 간주취득세를 부과하는 것은 이중과세에 해당할 수 있기 때문에, 모든 과점주주에게 간주취득세를 부과해서는 안 되고 의결권 등을 통하여 주주권을 실질적으로 행사하여 법인의 운영을 사실상 지배할 수 있는 과점주주에게만 간주취득세를 부과하는 것으로 위 조항을 제한적으로 해석하여야 한다. 따라서 주주명부에 과점주주에 해당하는 주식을 취득한 것으로 기재되었다고 하더라도 주식에 관한 권리를 실질적으로 행사하여 법인의 운영을 지배할 수 없었던 경우에는 간주취득세를 낼 의무를 지지 않는다고 보아야 한다.
Order
상고를 기각한다. 상고비용은 피고가 부담한다.
Unofficial English translation
The appeal is dismissed. The costs of the final appeal shall be borne by the defendant.
Provisions referred to
구 지방세법(2010. 3. 31. 법률 제10221호로 전부 개정되기 전의 것) 제22조 제2호(현행 지방세기본법 제46조 제2호 참조), 제105조 제6항(현행 제7조 제5항 참조)
Read 2026-10-25 · Cross-read 2026-10-25. All quotes matched against the official text. The Chinese-character placeholders the court used for anonymised parties are given in their Korean readings, and parenthetical Chinese-character glosses are omitted.
Every entry is published only after all quotes have been matched character by character against the official text, and audited by an independent second reading from a different model family across all eight axes. Both agreed axes and text-grounded interpretive divergences are recorded openly. The ledger is a research record, not an assessment of the court or advice on any matter.
Back to the ledger