이 사건 토지의 양도에 관한 이 사건 부과처분은 부과제척기간이 지나 이루어진 처분으로서 무효임[국패]
Seoul Administrative Court-2017-Gu Group-10657 ( October 07, 2018)
The disposition of this case on the transfer of land in this case shall be null and void after the expiration of the exclusion period of imposition.
The plaintiff's act of submitting a explanatory statement stating false facts to the defendant cannot be viewed as "Fraud or other unlawful act in imposing transfer income tax on the land of this case which the plaintiff acquired originally."
Period for exclusion of imposition of national taxes under Article 26-2 of the Framework Act on National Taxes
2018Nu39425 Revocation of Disposition of Imposing capital gains tax
AA
BB Director of the Tax Office
July 5, 2018
August 23, 2018
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
1. Purport of claim
On July 1, 2016, the Defendant confirmed that the imposition of capital gains tax of KRW 145,006,00 (including additional taxes) for the year 2008 against the Plaintiff is null and void. Preliminaryly, the Defendant’s imposition of capital gains tax of KRW 145,006,00 (including additional taxes) for the Plaintiff on July 1, 2016 shall be revoked.
2. Purport of appeal
The judgment of the first instance is revoked. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.
1. cite of the reasons for the written judgment in the first instance;
The reasoning for this Court regarding this case is as follows, and thus, it is consistent with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
○ 5.00 The following shall be added to 4 lines "less:
“Fraud or other unlawful act” may not be deemed to constitute “Fraud or other unlawful act solely on the pretext of a nominal title, barring special circumstances, such as where the nominal title holder obtains income by disguised the name of the taxpayer, and furthermore, it comes from the purpose of evading tax, and where such active act is added, such as the preparation of a false contract and the false payment thereof, false tax return to the tax authority, false registration or record, and preparation and keeping of a false account book (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Du4158, Apr. 13, 2017).
The Plaintiff, while transferring the instant land, prepared a statement (No. 21) stating the reason for sale (transfer) in the name of CCC and submitted it to DD Mayor, which includes that “The Plaintiff acquired the instant land for several years,” but the said document was prepared and submitted for permission to trade the land, and the administrative agency subject to submission is the D market in charge of permission to trade the land, which is not the Defendant, and does not include the content that the instant land was directly cut.”
2. Conclusion
Since the judgment of the first instance is justifiable, the defendant's appeal is dismissed as it is groundless.