Open Decision Ledger · Tax & international taxation
Deemed acquisition tax and the unchanged total share ratio of related holders
Supreme Court, May 7, 2021, 2020Du49324 (judgment)
Case name: 취득세등부과처분취소
Official text on the National Law Information Center
Question
Where a company acquired all the shares of another company from the spouse and children of its own executive, did it become a major shareholder liable to deemed acquisition tax under Article 7(5) of the former Local Tax Act, even though the total share ratio held by the old and the new major shareholders did not change?
Holding
Whether a person falls within the major shareholders bearing the deemed acquisition tax under Article 7(5) of the former Local Tax Act is judged by the increase in the total share ratio held by the group of major shareholders, not by the increase in one shareholder's shares. So a transferee who was not a shareholder before, but who is related by kinship or otherwise to the existing major shareholders, may fall outside the tax if the total ratio held by the old and the new major shareholders does not change. Whether the transferors are persons of special relationship to the acquiring company is decided under Article 2(1)(34)(b) of the former Local Tax Framework Act and Article 2-2(2)(iii) of its former Enforcement Decree: they may be such persons if they live with an executive of the acquiring company, and the acquiring company is then treated as theirs.
Summary of the holding, verbatim
따라서 과점주주 집단 내부에서 주식이 이전되거나 기존의 과점주주와 친족 기타 특수관계에 있으나 해당 법인의 주주가 아니었던 자가 기존의 과점주주로부터 그 주식의 일부 또는 전부를 이전받아 새로 과점주주가 되었더라도 기존의 과점주주와 새로운 과점주주가 소유한 총주식의 비율에 변동이 없다면 간주취득세의 과세대상이 될 수 없다.
Unofficial English translation
Accordingly, even where shares are transferred within a group of controlling shareholders, or where a person who is a relative of or otherwise in a special relationship with an existing controlling shareholder but was not a shareholder of the corporation receives some or all of the shares from the existing controlling shareholder and newly becomes a controlling shareholder, if there is no change in the ratio of the total shares held by the existing controlling shareholder and the new controlling shareholder, it cannot become subject to deemed acquisition tax.
Disposition
Reversed and remanded Stated in the decision
원심판결을 파기하고, 사건을 서울고등법원에 환송한다.
Unofficial English translation
The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Seoul High Court.
Form of the test
Elements stated Stated in the decision
과점주주 집단이 소유한 총주식 비율의 증가를 기준으로 판단하여야 한다.
Unofficial English translation
It must be determined on the basis of an increase in the ratio of the total shares held by the group of controlling shareholders.
Factors
- 과점주주 집단이 소유한 총주식 비율의 증가를 기준으로 판단하여야 한다
- 기존의 과점주주와 새로운 과점주주가 소유한 총주식의 비율에 변동이 없다면
- 병 등은 갑 회사의 임원인 을의 배우자와 자녀들이므로 을과 생계를 함께한다면
- 갑 회사도 병 등의 특수관계인으로 보아야 한다는 이유로
- 특수관계에 있는 갑 회사와 병 등이 소유한 총주식의 비율에 변동이 없으므로
Unofficial English translation
• It must be determined on the basis of an increase in the ratio of the total shares held by the group of controlling shareholders
• If there is no change in the ratio of the total shares held by the existing controlling shareholder and the new controlling shareholder,
• C and the others are the spouse and children of B, an officer of A Co., Ltd., and therefore if they maintain their livelihood together with B,
• on the ground that A Co., Ltd. should also be regarded as a special related person of C and the others,
• since there is no change in the ratio of the total shares held by A Co., Ltd. and C and the others, who are in a special relationship,
Relation to precedent
Follows earlier decisions Stated in the decision
대법원 2007. 8. 23. 선고 2007두10297 판결(공2007하, 1482), 대법원 2013. 7. 25. 선고 2012두12495 판결(공2013하, 1626)
Unofficial English translation
Supreme Court Decision 2007Du10297 decided August 23, 2007 (Gong 2007 Ha, 1482), Supreme Court Decision 2012Du12495 decided July 25, 2013 (Gong 2013 Ha, 1626)
Decisions referred to
[1] 대법원 2007. 8. 23. 선고 2007두10297 판결(공2007하, 1482), 대법원 2013. 7. 25. 선고 2012두12495 판결(공2013하, 1626)
Burden of proof
Not addressed Not in the decision
Open question and revisit condition
Who must prove that the transferors lived with an executive of the acquiring company when the tax office levies deemed acquisition tax on that ground?
The remand judgment of the Seoul High Court, deciding whether the transferors lived with the plaintiff's executive, will show how the special-relationship requirement is applied in practice. Any amendment to Article 2(1)(34) of the Local Tax Framework Act or Article 2-2(2) of its Enforcement Decree, or a later decision revising the total share ratio test, would require this entry to be read again.
Cross-family AI independent reading & axis check
7 of 8 axes matched GPT-6 Astra (OpenAI, codex CLI) · 2026-10-26
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 8 (open question and revisit condition).
Axis 8 (Open question and revisit condition): Primary “Who must prove that the transferors lived with an executive of the acquiring company when the tax office levies deemed acquisition tax on that ground?” vs Independent “Did the executive's spouse and children actually share his livelihood so as to establish the special relationship required for exclusion from taxation?”
The primary asks who proves livelihood sharing for the levy while the independent asks whether livelihood sharing factually existed so they point to different issues.
따라서 과점주주 집단 내부에서 주식이 이전되거나 기존의 과점주주와 친족 기타 특수관계에 있으나 해당 법인의 주주가 아니었던 자가 기존의 과점주주로부터 그 주식의 일부 또는 전부를 이전받아 새로 과점주주가 되었더라도 기존의 과점주주와 새로운 과점주주가 소유한 총주식의 비율에 변동이 없다면 간주취득세의 과세대상이 될 수 없다.Raw 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 28 August 2020 (2020Nu33673), held that A, the spouse, did not exercise dominant influence over the plaintiff's management, so no management-control relationship under Article 2(1)(34)(c) of the former Local Tax Framework Act existed between them. On the economic relationship under item (34)(b), it reasoned that since B, the executive, held no shares in Company J, the target corporation, the special relationship between the plaintiff and A and the children could not be assessed by reference to B, and so the acquisition tax assessment was lawful.
Supreme Court standard: The Supreme Court found no error on the management-control relationship under item (34)(c). It held that the court below had misread the scope of persons of special relationship and had failed to examine whether A and the children, the spouse and children of the plaintiff's executive B, lived with B and so were persons of special relationship under item (34)(b) and Article 2-2(2)(iii) of the Enforcement Decree. Since that unexamined point could show that the total share ratio did not change and that no deemed acquisition tax was due, it reversed the whole judgment and remanded the case to the Seoul High Court.
Distinguishing conditions
- A transferee who takes shares from outside the group of major shareholders, so that the total share ratio held by that group increases.
- Transferors who do not live with any executive of the acquiring company, so that they are not persons of special relationship under item (34)(b) and the Enforcement Decree.
- A case governed by the Local Tax Act and the Local Tax Framework Act as amended by Act No. 14474 of 27 December 2016 and later, since the decision applied the earlier versions.
Record verification notes
Fix first the version of the Local Tax Act, the Local Tax Framework Act and its Enforcement Decree in force on the date the shares were acquired, since the whole rule was applied to the pre-2017 texts. Then take the full shareholding on both sides before and after the transfer and check that the total ratio really did not move, and gather what shows whether the transferors lived with an executive of the acquiring company on that date.
From the official text
Points at issue
[1] 구 지방세법 제7조 제5항의 간주취득세 납세의무를 부담하는 과점주주에 해당하는지 판단하는 기준 및 기존의 과점주주와 특수관계에 있는 자가 기존의 과점주주로부터 주식을 이전받았으나 기존의 과점주주와 새로운 과점주주가 소유한 총주식의 비율에 변동이 없는 경우 간주취득세의 과세대상이 되는지 여부(소극) [2] 갑 주식회사가 그 회사 임원 을의 배우자 병과 자녀들로부터 정 주식회사의 주식 전부를 취득함으로써 구 지방세기본법 제47조 제2호에서 정한 과점주주가 되었음을 전제로 구 지방세법 제7조 제5항에 따라 정 회사의 부동산을 취득한 것으로 보고 관할 구청장이 갑 회사에 취득세 등을 부과한 사안에서, 병 등이 갑 회사의 임원인 을과 생계를 함께한다면 갑 회사의 특수관계인에 해당할 수 있고, 갑 회사도 병 등의 특수관계인으로 보아야 한다는 이유로, 갑 회사가 병 등으로부터 정 회사의 주식 전부를 양수하여 새로 과점주주가 되었더라도 특수관계에 있는 갑 회사와 병 등이 소유한 총주식의 비율에 변동이 없으므로 간주취득세의 과세대상이 되지 않을 수 있다고 한 사례
Unofficial English translation
[1] The standard for determining whether a person is a controlling shareholder bearing the obligation to pay deemed acquisition tax under Article 7 (5) of the former Local Tax Act, and whether deemed acquisition tax becomes subject to taxation where a person in a special relationship with an existing controlling shareholder receives shares from the existing controlling shareholder, but there is no change in the ratio of the total shares held by the existing controlling shareholder and the new controlling shareholder (negative) [2] In a case where the head of the competent district office imposed acquisition tax, etc. on A Co., Ltd., on the premise that A Co., Ltd., by acquiring all shares of D Co., Ltd. from C, the spouse of B, an officer of that company, and the children, had become a controlling shareholder prescribed in Article 47 subparagraph 2 of the former Framework Act on Local Taxes and was therefore deemed to have acquired the real estate of D Co., Ltd. pursuant to Article 7 (5) of the former Local Tax Act, a case in which it was held that if C and the others maintain their livelihood together with B, an officer of A Co., Ltd., they may fall under special related persons of A Co., Ltd., and that, on the ground that A Co., Ltd. should also be regarded as a special related person of C and the others, even though A Co., Ltd. acquired all shares of D Co., Ltd. from C and the others and newly became a controlling shareholder, the total shareholding ratio of A Co., Ltd. and C and the others, who are in a special relationship, has not changed, so it may not become subject to deemed acquisition tax
Summary of the holding
[1] 구 지방세법(2016. 12. 27. 법률 제14474호로 개정되기 전의 것) 제7조 제5항의 간주취득세 납세의무를 부담하는 과점주주에 해당하는지는 과점주주 중 특정 주주 1명의 주식의 증가를 기준으로 판단하는 것이 아니라 과점주주 집단이 소유한 총주식 비율의 증가를 기준으로 판단하여야 한다. 따라서 과점주주 집단 내부에서 주식이 이전되거나 기존의 과점주주와 친족 기타 특수관계에 있으나 해당 법인의 주주가 아니었던 자가 기존의 과점주주로부터 그 주식의 일부 또는 전부를 이전받아 새로 과점주주가 되었더라도 기존의 과점주주와 새로운 과점주주가 소유한 총주식의 비율에 변동이 없다면 간주취득세의 과세대상이 될 수 없다. [2] 화장품 제조업 등을 하는 갑 주식회사가 그 회사 임원 을의 배우자 병과 자녀들(이하 ‘병 등’이라 한다)로부터 정 주식회사의 주식 전부를 취득함으로써 구 지방세기본법(2016. 12. 27. 법률 제14474호로 전부 개정되기 전의 것, 이하 같다) 제47조 제2호에서 정한 과점주주가 되었음을 전제로 구 지방세법(2016. 12. 27. 법률 제14474호로 개정되기 전의 것) 제7조 제5항에 따라 정 회사의 부동산을 취득한 것으로 보고 관할 구청장이 갑 회사에 취득세 등을 부과한 사안에서, 병 등은 갑 회사의 임원인 을의 배우자와 자녀들이므로 을과 생계를 함께한다면, ‘갑 회사의 임원과 생계를 함께하는 친족’으로서 구 지방세기본법 제2조 제1항 제34호 (나)목, 구 지방세기본법 시행령(2017. 3. 27. 대통령령 제27958호로 전부 개정되기 전의 것) 제2조의2 제2항 제3호에 따라 갑 회사의 특수관계인에 해당할 수 있고, 병 등이 갑 회사의 특수관계인에 해당하면 갑 회사도 병 등의 특수관계인으로 보아야 한다는 이유로, 갑 회사가 병 등으로부터 정 회사의 주식 전부를 양수하여 새로 과점주주가 되었더라도 특수관계에 있는 갑 회사와 병 등이 소유한 총주식의 비율에 변동이 없으므로 간주취득세의 과세대상이 되지 않을 수 있음에도, 이와 달리 본 원심판결에 법리오해의 잘못이 있다고 한 사례.
Order
원심판결을 파기하고, 사건을 서울고등법원에 환송한다.
Unofficial English translation
The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Seoul High Court.
Provisions referred to
[1] 구 지방세법(2016. 12. 27. 법률 제14474호로 개정되기 전의 것) 제7조 제5항, 구 지방세기본법(2016. 12. 27. 법률 제14474호로 전부 개정되기 전의 것) 제2조 제1항 제34호, 제47조 제2호(현행 제46조 제2호), 구 지방세기본법 시행령(2017. 3. 27. 대통령령 제27958호로 전부 개정되기 전의 것) 제2조의2 제2항 제1호(현행 제2조 제2항 제1호), 제3호(현행 제2조 제2항 제3호), 제24조 제2항 [2] 구 지방세법(2016. 12. 27. 법률 제14474호로 개정되기 전의 것) 제7조 제5항, 구 지방세기본법(2016. 12. 27. 법률 제14474호로 전부 개정되기 전의 것) 제2조 제1항 제34호 (나)목, 제47조 제2호(현행 제46조 제2호), 구 지방세기본법 시행령(2017. 3. 27. 대통령령 제27958호로 전부 개정되기 전의 것) 제2조의2 제2항 제1호(현행 제2조 제2항 제1호), 제3호(현행 제2조 제2항 제3호), 제24조 제2항
Read 2026-10-26 · Cross-read 2026-10-26. 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