과세자주권의 확대방안에 관한 연구

이전오(Lee Jeon-Oh) 한국토지공법학회 2007 土地公法硏究 Vol.37 No.1

  Local autonomy is the essence of democracy, as well as a prerequisite for grass-roots democracy. For local autonomy to prosper, there is a need for an increased, autonomous local finance. Right to self-finance allows for a local government to deal with its finances under self-administration. It can be inferred then, that the right to self-finance plays an important role for the local government along with the sovereign right to legislative, systematic and administrative power.<BR>  Then, the core of right to self-finance can be said to be the "autonomous right to tax": the sovereign right of a local government to place and collect local tax from the residents. Autonomous right to tax, to be more specific, is [the sovereign right of a local government to exercise its right to local tax, being able to set standards of its own on tax items or tax rates]. Therefore, autonomous right to tax is undoubtedly an indispensable tool in achieving the goal of local autonomy. Autonomous right to tax is further stated in articles such as the article 135 of local autonomy law, article 2 and section 1 of article 3 of local tax law.<BR>  This paper deals with autonomous right to tax in mainly two parts. First, this paper examines whether a local government, by its own, can form a new tax item according to the municipal ordinance under the current Constitution, the local autonomy law and the local law.<BR>  According to the proviso of article 22 of the local autonomy law, it seems unlikable that a local government, by its own, can form a new tax item according to the municipal ordinance. Nevertheless, the local tax law should be revised so that local governments can form new tax items by themselves according to the municipal ordinance in order to exercise their right to self-finance and expand local finances.<BR>  Second, regarding tax base or tax rates, which are the main determinant of the volume of a local tax, the current local tax law does not properly assure autonomous right to tax to local governments. But in the long run, the local tax law and any other laws concerned should be amended so that local governments are given as much opportunities as possible to exercise their sovereign rights in the decision making of tax base and tax rate.

조세법률의 입법절차에 관한 연구

이전오(Lee, Jeon Oh) 성균관대학교 법학연구소 2010 성균관법학 Vol.22 No.2

The current tax law is flawed, in that it is too massive in volume, difficult to understand, and unsystematic, thus many tax laws have been decided unconstitutional since the establishment of the Constitutional Court in 1988. At this point, this paper studies how to improve the current tax legislation so that it accords with the constitution and tax principles, and protects the rights and interests of taxpayers. Problems of the current tax legislation are as follows. First, tax legislation for the purpose of political objective is too excessive. For example, the government tried in vain to solve the skyrocketing real estate prices by devising laws such as `excessively increased valuable land tax`and`comprehensive real estate holding tax`. Second, there is not enough legal screening in the process of tax legislation. Failure to fully recognize the correlation between tax law and the constitution, and lack of participation of legal experts in the legislative process have led to the result of many tax laws that were decided unconstitutional. Third, as the National Assembly is failing to lead legislation and the executive have come to lead the job instead, there has not been substantial consideration or review on legislative bills. In the future, tax legislation procedures should be improved as follows. First, the number of personnel, especially legal experts, in charge of drafting tax legislative bills should be increased. In the concrete, a`tax legislative department`needs to be created in the tax division of the Ministry of Strategy and Finance. In addition, the composing and managing of personnel in the Tax System Improvement Committee currently installed in the Ministry of Strategy and Finance should be improved so that the committee can fully serve its function as an advisory committee. Second, to improve the National Assembly's screening and review on tax legislative bills, members of the Committee of Strategy and Finance should be composed of personnel with expertise, and members who are reelected or more should be located in the identical committee so as to build up their expertise. Also, authorized power of the Committee of Legality and Wording should be increased to allow the committee to engage in legal screening including matters of constitutionality. Third, Legal Support Organizations currently disorderly dispersed throughout the National Assembly should be merged and abolished to form a unified Legal Support Organization(ex. `Department of Legislative Support`). Fourth, legislative public hearings and legislative hearings should be vitalized. Fifth, considering how the Whole House Committee of the National Assembly is serving as a fine complementary system to the General Committee of the National Assembly, the scope of legislative bills subject to the General Committee's screening should be limited to money-concerned bills such as those concerning tax, or power authorization related bills concerning budget allocation or budget execution. Further, requirements for opening a General Committee's meeting should be eased to 30 or more enrolling members so as to vitalize the Whole House Committee system. Ultimately, the current tax law system, which is disordered and unsystematic, should be reformed through a Tax Law Rewrite Project. The current tax law system is faced with problems such as complexity, redundancy, lack of unity, difficulty in understanding, and lack of systematic order. To solve these problems and establish a tax law system that corresponds with the constitution, a national project should be started to rewrite the overall current tax law according to the basic principles of drafting a tax legislative bill, and a standard tax legislative system that is based on such principles.

부동산신탁의 부가가치세 납세의무자에 관한 연구

이전오(Lee, Jeon Oh) 성균관대학교 법학연구소 2015 성균관법학 Vol.27 No.2

신탁은 신탁자가 신탁재산을 수탁자에게 이전하고, 수탁자가 그 신탁재산을 관리ㆍ처분ㆍ운용ㆍ개발하여 그 수익을 신탁자 또는 수익자에게 지급하는 제도이다. 신탁이 설정되면 신탁재산이 위탁자(신탁자)를 떠나서 수탁자의 소유가 된다는 점에서 신탁은 법인(회사)과 유사한 제도이다. 그러나, 신탁재산 그 자체로 독자적인 법인격을 가지지 못하고 수탁자를 통하여 재산의 관리 및 처분 등이 이루어지고, 그 수익이 신탁자나 수익자에게 지급된다는 점에서 법인과 다르다. 이와 같은 차이 때문에 소득세법 및 법인세법에서는 신탁을 도관처럼 보고서 수탁자가 아니라 수익자(자익신탁이라면 위탁자 겸 수익자)를 소득의 주체로 보아 납세의무자로 규정하고 있다. 그러나 신탁을 법인격이 인정되지 않는 도관으로 취급한다고 하여 신탁재산의 실체를 아예 없는 것으로 본다는 의미는 아니다. 신탁법에서는 오히려 신탁재산의 독립성을 규정하고 있다. 나아가 수탁자의 법률행위를 허위표시 등의 무효로 본다는 의미는 더욱 아니다. 수탁자는 신탁재산을 관리ㆍ처분ㆍ운용ㆍ개발하는 내용의 법률행위를 완전하게 할 수 있는 권한을 가지고 있고, 그 법률행위의 효과는 수탁자에게 귀속한다. 따라서, 소득세 및 법인세법이 신탁을 도관처럼 보고 수익자를 납세의무자로 본다고 하여 부가가치세의 납세의무자도 당연히 수익자로 보아야 하는 것은 아니라고 생각한다. 부가가치세의 납세의무자인 사업자가 되기 위하여서는 재화나 용역에 대한 지배권을 가지고 그것을 공급할 수 있는 지위에 있으면 충분하고, 이익을 얻었는지 여부는 사업자를 판별하는 기준이 아니다. 이런 관점에서 보면, 법률상 완전한 소유자로서 재화나 용역의 공급자인 수탁자를 부동산신탁의 부가가치세 납세의무자로 보는 것이 타당하다. 위탁자를 부가가치세의 납세의무자로 보는 견해는 신탁과 위탁매매 사이의 본질적인 차이를 무시한 것이고, 수익자를 부가가치세의 납세의무자로 보는 견해는 부가가치세는 소득이 아니라 거래행위(재화나 용역의 공급)를 과세물건으로 한다는 점에 반하므로 부당하다. 즉, 부동산의 관리처분신탁ㆍ담보신 탁ㆍ토지신탁(개발신탁)의 부가가치세 납세의무자를 위탁자나 수익자로 보는 것은 신탁제도 및 부가가치세의 본질에 맞지 아니하고, 현실적으로도 세무행정에 많은 어려움을 초래한다. 수탁자를 납세의무자로 보는 것이 이론상으로나 세무행정상 타당하므로, 신탁의 부가가치세 납세의무자가 수탁자라는 점을 명확하게 규정할 필요가 있다. Trust refers to a legal relation where a person(“truster”) transfers a specific piece of property to another person(“trustee”), who then establishes a security right or makes any other disposition and is required to manage, dispose of, operate, or develop such property or engage in other necessary conduct to fulfill the purpose of the trust, for the benefit of a specific person(“beneficiary”) or for a specific purpose, based on a confidence relation between the truster and the trustee. This paper addresses who should be the taxpayer among a truster, a trustee, or a beneficiary when a real property in trust is disposed of or sold. While no specific provision on this matter exists, the Supreme Court states that in the case of a trust where the truster himself receives benefits from the trust, the truster should be the taxpayer of Value-Added Tax, while in the case of a trust where a third party(beneficiary) other than the truster receives benefits from the trust, the beneficiary should be the taxpayer. The Supreme Court regards consignment sale and trust as same though both have different structures. In the case of a consignment sale, a consignee has no ownership of the objective goods, whereas in the case of a trust, a trustee has full ownership of the trust property. Further, the Supreme Court's view does not conform to the fundamental nature of Value-Added Tax since it is not a type of income tax based on to whom income through a transaction should be attributed, but a type of consumption tax focusing who is the supplier on a trade or sale. It is sufficient for a person to be a taxpayer under Value-Added Tax when he has full ownership and right to control and dispose of the objective goods. Since the trustee is a complete owner of a trust property, he should be the taxpayer of Value-Added Tax when the trust property is sold or disposed of. The amendment of relative articles of the current Value-Added Tax Act would be needed.

명의신탁재산 증여의제 규정 폐지시의 대안에 관한 연구

이전오(Lee Jeon Oh) 성균관대학교 법학연구소 2017 성균관법학 Vol.29 No.3

상속세 및 증여세법 제45조의2는 주식에 관하여 실질 주주가 자신의 이름으로 주주명부에 등재하지 아니하고 타인의 이름으로 등재하는 경우에는 명의를 빌려준 명의수탁자에게 증여세를 부과한다고 규정하고 있다. 이른바 명의신탁재산에 대한 증여의제규정이다. 그런데, 탈세나 탈법행위를 방지하고자 하는 주식 명의신탁에 대한 증여의제규정의 입법목적은 충분히 이해가 가지만, 기본적으로 아무런 재산상 이익을 얻지 못한 명의수탁자에게 증여세를 부과하는 것이 헌법상 과연 정당한가라는 근본적인 의문을 둘러싸고 여러 차례 헌법재판이 제기되었다. 헌법재판소에서 합헌결정이 났지만, 위헌이라는 소수의견이 많게는 4명까지 있었다. 그 후 지금까지, 헌법재판소의 합헌결정에 불구하고 위헌 논란은 여전하다. 명의신탁재산에 대한 증여의제규정은, 아무런 재산상 이익을 얻지 못했기 때문에 담세력이 없는 명의수탁자에게 증여세를 부과하는 것이므로, 조세법의 기본원리인 실질과세원칙에 반하므로 헌법에 위반된다고 생각한다. 따라서, 위 규정은 폐지되어야 한다. 명의신탁재산의 증여의제를 규정한 현행 상속세 및 증여세법 제45조의 2를 폐지한 이후의 대책으로는, 아무런 대안을 제시하지 않는 방안, 부동산처럼 형사처벌 및 과징금을 부과하는 방안, 폐지 후 형사처벌은 하지 않고 과징금만 부과하는 방안, 폐지 후 과태료를 부과하는 방안 등을 생각해 볼 수 있다. 그 중에서 과태료를 부과하는 방안으로서 명의신탁자 및 명의수탁자 모두에게 과태료를 부과하는 방안이 타당하다고 생각한다. 그 이유는 명의신탁재산에 대한 증여의제규정의 본질이 행정상 제재인 것과 일치하고, 자기책임의 원칙에도 부합하기 때문이다. Article 45-2 of the Inheritance tax and Gift Tax Act stipulates that if a real shareholder does not register in the shareholder s name under his name and registers in the name of another person, tax official shall impose a gift tax on the person who borrowed the name. It is the provision of the fictitious donation of registered property under a third party s name. I think that the provision of the fictitious donation of registered property under a third party s name is a violation of the Constitution because it is against the principle of substance over form taxation which is the basic principle of the tax law because it imposes a gift tax on the trustee who does not possess any ability-to-pay. Therefore, the above clause should be abolished. Measures after abolishing the current Article 45-2 of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act that prescribe the fictitious donation of registered property under a third party s name include measures not to offer any alternative, imposing criminal penalties and penalties like real estate, imposing negligence penalties. Among them, I think it is reasonable to impose negligence penalties on the trustor and the trustee. This alternative is consistent with the fact that the character of the fictitious donation of registered property under a third party s name is an administrative sanction and also conforms to the principle of self-responsibility.

당초 과세처분과 증액경정처분의 관계에 대한 연구 : 대법원 2009. 5. 14. 선고 2006두17390 판결 평석

이전오(Lee Jeon Oh) 성균관대학교 법학연구소 2009 성균관법학 Vol.21 No.2

The relation between originally-determined assessment and reassessment to increase tax amount affects many aspects in taxation including subject-matter of a lawsuit, scope of trial, period of filing lawsuit, and disposition on default. Regarding to the relation between originally-determined assessment and reassessment for correction, there were diverse opinions such as parallel theory, absorption theory, paralleled absorption theory, reverse absorption theory, and paralleled reverse absorption theory. The Supreme Court decisions viewed that the originally-determined assessment is absorbed into the reassessment, or corrective disposition, therefore taxpayers should not appeal the originally-determined assessment, but should the reassessment. To cope with the above decisions, Article 22-2(Effect of Correction, etc.) of Framework Act on National Taxes was legislated in December 18, 2002. It says that "Any correction which causes an increase in a tax amount determined originally under tax-related Acts shall not affect the relation of rights and duties under such tax-related Acts, including this Act, with respect to such tax amount originally determined." In spite of the enactment of the above article, the dispute about relation between originally-determined assessment and reassessment to increase tax amount was not resolved until Supreme Court Decision 2006Du17390 delivered on May 14, 2009, which declared the original tax return or determination is absorbed into the disposition for correction, thus only the latter can be object of appeal by taxpayers. However, taking into account the facts that originally-determined assessment and assessment is made separately and the legislative intent of Article 22-2 of Framework Act on National Taxes should be regarded, I don't agree with the absorption theory. Then, it should be that the original determination is not absorbed into the reassessment to increase tax amount, which results that both are combined to make an single assessment which can be the object of appeal. Further, though time for appeal to original determination is lapsed, court can review the original determination to judge whether total tax amount is correct or not.

법학전문대학원 교과과정의 몇 가지 쟁점

이전오(Lee, Jeon-Oh) 성균관대학교 법학연구소 2010 성균관법학 Vol.22 No.3

Almost two years have passed since the introduction of the professional law school system in Korea. Now that the system is taking shape, the most important task that remains now is to decide what to teach in professional law schools, and how. This may well be the most important and fundamental thesis underlying the purpose of the establishment of professional law schools and yet, not enough studies have been made on the subject nor has a consensus been reached among the professors or between professors and students. This paper seeks to answer the above question of what to teach in professional law schools and how, or in other words, how to compose the curriculum of professional law schools, with the case of Sungkyunkwan Law School. As a matter of fact, the answer to the above question is already stated in Article 2 of Act On the Establishment and Management of Professional Law Schools. The article states that "the educational ideology of professional law schools is to train legal professionals who have sound professional ethics based on rich education, a deep understanding of people and the society, and morals valuing freedom, equality and justice; and who have knowledge and abilities that will allow professional and efficient solutions to diverse legal disputes, in order to provide high quality legal services responding to the diverse expectations and requests of the people. In order to preserve the intent of the above law, professional law schools should reflect on the former law education, which was remote from solutions to real-life problems but merely stayed at the stage of education focused on abstract theories and preparation for examinations. Accordingly, the curriculum of professional law schools should be distinctively different from that of the past, and should be reformed so that legal professionals are trained to hold a sense of morals and values, and are capable of providing professional and efficient solutions to complex legal disputes. Taking the above points into consideration, the curriculum of Sungkyunkwan Law School was composed as follows. First, balance between mandatory and non-mandatory courses was considered. Second, balance between theoretic and practical courses was considered. Third, a eight-major-category-system was introduced to help students raise their basic talents as legal professionals and proficiency in their area of expertise. Fourth, and unified education was implemented with new learning methods such as team teaching and PBL to help students raise practical and creative problem-solving abilities. Fifth, more opportunities for various externships and internships were provided to the students to help them raise their practical abilities and experience more about their area of expertise. Sixth, through a substantial exchange with universities abroad, more opportunities were provided to the students to increase their foreign language abilities and ultimately, strengthen their international competitiveness. The following are what need to be complemented to the curriculum of Korea's professional law schools, including Sungkyunkwan Law School. First, in order for professional law schools to advance from an institute that just prepares students for examinations, to amore specialized and professional educative institute, the number of mandatory courses should be minimized and the students' right of choice maximized. Second, considering the establishing purpose of professional law schools and the reality where professional law school graduates are immediately thrown into actual business, the number of practical courses should be increased and the content of the education strengthened. Third, the former cramming system of education should be avoided and instead, new learning methods such as question-and-answer, Socratic method, team teaching, and PBL should be adopted and encouraged.

유사매매사례가액에 의한 상속 및 증여재산 평가제도의 문제점과 개선방안에 관한 연구

이전오(Lee , Jeon Oh) 성균관대학교 법학연구소 2010 성균관법학 Vol.22 No.1

Inheritance Tax Act and Gift Tax Act Article 60 (1) says that the value of a property on which the inheritance tax or the gift tax is levied shall be based on its current market value at the donation date or the commencement date of succession (the "appraisal base day"). and Article 60 (2) says that the current market value, under the provisions of paragraph (1), shall be the value recognized as having been arranged under normal conditions in the case of transactions effected freely between many and unspecified persons, and shall include the public sale price from expropriation and appraised price, etc., current market values recognized pursuant to the Presidential Decree. Further the Presidential Decree Article 49 (1) and (5) describe that comparable asset in size, location, use and category which was sold between six months before or later of the death date or three months before or later of the gift date are also regarded as current market value. However, the above clauses have the following problems. (1) Difficulty in information gathering The National Tax Service holds the accumulated data for whether there are other assets which are of similar area, location, use, or item to those of the concerned asset but does not provide this information to the public. For this reason, individuals have no choice but to personally gather information through real estate agents or by other means, but this is practically impossible. (2) Disregarding of individual quality Despite the fact that apartments of same location or area can have different sale prices depending on factors such as their located number of floor, view access rights, access rights to sunlight, interior design, and proximity to schools or subways, such factors are not properly taken into consideration and evaluated. (3) Problems regarding equity between assets/ Inequality between assets Because houses, shopping districts, and land are difficult to evaluate by their comparable sales, most application cases of comparable sales clause are focused on apartments. As a result, apartments have a tendency to be unfavorably treated compared to other assets and there arises the problem of taxation imbalance. (4) Possibilities of discretionary judgment of taxation authorities There are no specific criteria or standards for what satisfies the condition of 'similarity' and since tax payers do not have access to the data base of the National Tax Service, the transparency and objectivity of taxation can not be guaranteed. As a result, discretionary judgement of the taxation authorities can be feared. Therefore, the comparable sales clause should be improved as the following: (1) The evaluation system of inheritance and gift assets by comparable sales should be repealed in principle. Especially, the part which views the sales price of comparable sales cases taking place after the happening of inheritance or gift as the market price of inherited or gifted assets should be deleted, since it is difficult and unfair for the tax payer to predict a sales price for a future deal which did not even take place yet. (2) If this regulation is to be maintained, the system should be improved in a way that sufficient information is given to the tax payers by the taxation authorities. In other words, the system should be improved so that tax payers may accurately identify their inheritance and gift assets by comparable sales before their time of tax return. To be specific, a systematic installation of replying to taxpayer’}s inquiries with information concerning sales price of comparable sales should be made possible by the taxation authorities. (3) Even when there are differences in sales price of comparable sales and market price, there needs to be complementary clauses which regard the market price within 30% boundary to the comparable sales price as a regular trade price.

종합부동산세제의 문제점에 관한 고찰

이전오(Lee, Jeon-Oh) 성균관대학교 법학연구소 2011 성균관법학 Vol.23 No.3

The formative and inducive function of today’s taxation is clearly undeniable. Nevertheless, it has been held in all ages that the nature of taxation lies in the delivering of expenses in running a nation, with other policy derived objectives as only subsidiary purposes, such as the redistribution of wealth, encouraging or supressing of particular economic activities, or achieving social equality. However, Korea has seen great tendencies to use taxation for policy derived purposes or even worse, as a means of expressing political beliefs, with Comprehensive Real Estate Holding Tax being the most representative case. On November 13, 2008, the Constitutional Court ruled Comprehensive Real Estate Holding Tax Act partially unconstitutional and partially incompatible with the Constitution, which seemed to put an end to the controversy surrounding the issue on the surface. Nevertheless, the conclusion and the underlying reasoning of the court requires further examination, not to mention that Comprehensive Real Estate Holding Tax pose several questions for consideration, including the nature and function of taxation. Whatever the legitimacy or justification for the purposes of government pursued policies, the means to an end should not be discrepant from the principles of the Constitution or the basic principles of tax law. In this sense, Comprehensive Real Estate Holding Tax is an irrational taxation that is against the nature of theories or policies of taxation, as well as one that goes against the legal principles of the Constitution or the tax system. Due to the aforementioned grounds, it is only right that Comprehensive Real Estate Holding Tax be abolished. Should there be a need for the strengthening or revision of Real Estate Holding Tax, such need should be satisfied by reforming Property Tax under Local Tax, but not through abnormal tax policies such as Comprehensive Real Estate Holding Tax.

제2차납세의무를 지는 과점주주의 범위에 관한 연구

이전오(Lee Jeon-Oh) 성균관대학교 법학연구소 2007 성균관법학 Vol.19 No.2

  The secondary tax liability of oligopolistic stockholders is against the principle of a stockholder"s limited liability-the dominant principle of corporation law-and extends a tax liability to a third party originally irresponsible for the obligation.<BR>  However, not only does the system of secondary tax liability of oligopolistic stockholders infringe upon the property right of the concerned oligopolistic stockholders but it is also against the principle of equal rights, as the oligopolistic stockholders would be unreasonably discriminated.<BR>  To shift the original tax liability to a third party, there should be a reasonable cause and even so, the extent should be limited to the minimum.<BR>  Therefore, the existing Article 39 of the Basic Law for National Taxes should be abolished and instead, like Article 36 of the National Tax Collection Law of Japan, a new article charging only particular beneficiary of oligopolistic stockholders should be established.<BR>  In other words, a new article should be established so that secondary tax liability is charged only in the following circumstances:<BR>  (1) a company has in some way illegally attributed whole or part of its income to people with special relationships among the oligopolistic stockholders, or (2) a company has unfairly distributed interests while in transaction with people with a special relationship.<BR>  In these cases, the people with a special relationship shall have the secondary liability for tax payment with regard to the shortage within the distributed interests.<BR>  If it is difficult to abolish Article 39 of the Basic Law for National Taxes at the moment, Article 39 (1) (ⅱ) (a) and (c) should be deleted and (b) should be revised so that oligopolistic stockholders have the secondary tax liability only if they have used the corporate body"s management as a means of tax avoidance.

국세기본법 제39조 제1항 제2호 가 목의 과점주주의 범위에 관한 연구 - 대법원 2008.1.10. 선고 2006두19105 판결 평석

이전오(Lee Jeon-Oh) 성균관대학교 법학연구소 2008 성균관법학 Vol.20 No.2

  The Supreme Court"s 2006du19105, decided January 10, 2008 held that:<BR>  "Considering the legislative purpose and the amendment history of Article 39 of Framework Act On National Taxes, it is reasonable to interpret that the purpose of the proviso of Paragraph 1 and the provision of Paragraph 1, Subparagraph 2, Item ga is to indicate that among the oligopolistic stockholders stated in Article 39, Paragraph 2, those who hold 51% or more of the outstanding shares issued and exercises actual rights to those shares bear the secondary tax liability only to the extent of their ownership shares, but does not require an oligopolistic stockholder to actually exercise his rights to the shares of 51% or more by only himself."<BR>  However, for the reasons that follow, I don"t agree with the conclusion of the Supreme Court"s decision above.<BR>  First of all, though there are various ways to interpret the law, the most fundamental and important one is the way of contextual interpretation. However, the above decision goes against the way of interpretation based on context.<BR>  Secondly, considering how the legislative purpose of secondary tax liability originated from fear that the shareholders who hold shares exceeding 50% may abuse the corporate entity, the court decision above is not royal to the legislator"s intent.<BR>  Thirdly, the Supreme Court"s decision above is against the holding of the Constitutional Court"s 97 hun-ga 13, decided May 28, 1998 and circumstances of how Article 39 of Framework Act On National Taxes was revised afterwards.<BR>  Lastly, should the purpose of Article 39, Paragraph 1, Subparagraph 2, Item ga of Framework Act On National Taxes be interpreted as the Supreme Court ruled, - a means to make all the stockholders in the category of oligopolistic stockholders bear the secondary tax liability but not just a particular stockholder who holds shares exceeding 50% - there is no particular need to separately enact Article 39, Paragraph 1, Subparagraph 2, Item ga of Framework Act On National Taxes.<BR>  In conclusion, Article 39, Paragraph 1, Subparagraph 2, Item ga of Framework Act On National Taxes should be interpreted as a means to make bear the secondary tax liability to an individual stockholder who owns shares exceeding 50% by only himself, but not every stockholder who just belong to the category of oligopolistic stockholders of Article 39, Paragraph 2.