양도소득세부과처분취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. The plaintiff is the farmland in this case where "the plaintiff is not more than 4,165 square meters in the answer B in Kimhae-si."
On December 21, 2005, Eul purchased KRW 590 million on December 21, 2005, and sold KRW 1.077 billion on July 7, 201, KRW 2855/4165, and KRW 1310/4165 to E, respectively.
B. The Plaintiff filed an application for reduction or exemption of capital gains tax by applying the provisions on reduction or exemption of capital gains tax for farmland substitute land under the Restriction of Special Taxation Act with respect to KRW 100 million among the calculated tax amount of KRW 151 million at the time of filing a preliminary return of capital gains tax for the instant farmland, and on March 29, 2012, “the amount below 2,362.9 square meters” means “the instant substitute land”.
The acquisition was made.
C. On October 2012, the Defendant conducted on-site verification for the reduction of capital gains tax, ex post facto management and confirmation of acquisition value, and confirmed that the sales contract related to the acquisition that the Plaintiff submitted at the time of filing a report on capital gains tax was voluntarily prepared, and corrected the conversion acquisition value of KRW 590 million as KRW 395 million, and notified the Plaintiff of capital gains tax of KRW 46 million on December 7, 2012, and the Plaintiff voluntarily paid it.
Around January 2015, the defendant conducted the second on-site verification of the farmland in this case and substitute farmland, and judged that it is unclear whether the plaintiff's village was re-developed in the process.
Accordingly, the Defendant conducted a tax investigation of capital gains tax on the Plaintiff on March 2015, and as a result, confirmed that the Plaintiff had D residing near the farmland of this case and substitute farmland cultivated on behalf of the Plaintiff without being able to do so, and that he did not reside in the seat of the substitute farmland of this case.
E. Accordingly, on May 6, 2015, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of KRW 180,025,290 of the transfer income tax for the taxable year 201, by excluding the application of the special long-term holding deduction and the capital gains tax exemption pursuant to the farmland substitute land.
F. The Plaintiff’s denial of capital gains tax exemption for farmland substitute land and the instant farmland.