유류분반환청구와 과세에 관한 연구

In order to properly pinpoint the tax issue related to the Claim for Return ofLegally Secured Portion of Inheritance, it is necessary to find out the legal nature ofthe claim first. We believe that the interest of the right holder is not the return of aparticular object, but the return of a portion or value that is insufficient for thelegally secured portion, and that it should be approached from the perspective offorming a bond claim considering changes in the social structure or familyrelationship. In this regard, the claim for return does not invalidate the existing act of givingand return to the heirs' property. However, if a property worth secured portion isreturned, it can be regarded as a subordinate property under the Inheritance Act, andit is desirable to revise regulations in the Inheritance Act. As a result of the right holder’s request for secured portion, the other party canmake reduce of inheritance tax, which the law restricts what can be done only if thedispute over reseve portion is settled by a ruling or the like, but it is necessary toimprove it legislatively so that it can make a request for correction even if thesettlement is concluded by agreement. The same would be true of the donor's gifttax correction. In relation to the return of the value of secured portion, contrary to the taxationof capital gains actually made due to the establishment recommendation, there is acontradiction to determine the taxpayer's duty or transfer period. We should acceptthe position of the theory and normalize the taxation relationship. To this end, as in the case of Japan, the Korean Civil Code and the Detailed Tax Law should haveclear provisions for the right to claim for return, and legislative supplementationshould be made for the lack of articles.