취득세부과처분취소
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The first instance court.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On October 11, 201, the Plaintiff is an agricultural corporation established for the purpose of running business, such as tourist farm business, mushroom growing business, and sales business.
B. On December 10, 201, the Plaintiff purchased a forest No. 19,750 square meters and B forest Nos. 7,557 square meters from F in Yangyang-si, G, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on February 8, 2012.
C. On February 8, 2012, the Plaintiff filed an application for exemption of acquisition tax, etc. on the grounds that the former Restriction of Special Local Taxation Act (amended by Act No. 11138, Dec. 31, 201; hereinafter “Act”) constitutes “real estate acquired by a farming corporation within two years from the date of registration of incorporation to use in farming” under Article 11(1) of the former Restriction of Special Local Taxation Act (amended by Act No. 11138, Dec. 31, 2011; hereinafter “Act”). The Defendant exempted the Plaintiff from acquisition tax, etc. on the instant land.
After that, as a result of conducting a fact-finding survey on non-taxable, reduced or exempted real estate by the Plaintiff, the Defendant determined to collect acquisition tax, etc. reduced or exempted by deeming that the Plaintiff did not directly use the instant land for the relevant purpose without justifiable grounds until one year after the date of acquisition thereof (hereinafter “instant disposition”). On November 1, 2015, the Defendant issued a disposition imposing acquisition tax, etc. totaling KRW 11,478,020 (i.e., acquisition tax amounting to KRW 10,158,720) on the Plaintiff (i.e., acquisition tax amounting to KRW 879,54
E. On December 31, 2015, the Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an objection with the ordinary south-do Governor, but was dismissed on March 10, 2016.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. On February 8, 2012, the Plaintiff asserted that the instant land was acquired for the purpose of growing YFFF, and obtained authorization on a forest management plan from the Defendant on July 9, 2012, and employed the human father around October 2012, and on the ground of the instant land.