취득세등부과처분취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On March 8, 2011, the Plaintiff was a special purpose company established pursuant to Article 2 subparag. 5 of the Asset-Backed Securitization Act, and acquired, from the asset holder on March 29, 201, securitization assets in KRW 128.2 billion, including loans secured by a loan claim of 339-1, etc. (hereinafter “instant real estate”).
B. In order to recover the above loan claims, the Plaintiff directly participated in the auction procedure of the instant real estate, and won the instant real estate at the auction on November 15, 201, and paid the sale price on December 27, 201.
C. On January 3, 2012, the Plaintiff reported and paid acquisition tax, local education tax, and special rural development tax, which are calculated by deducting 50/100 from the tax base of acquisition tax amount of KRW 1,650,000 as to the instant real estate by reducing or exempting the tax amount.
On July 2, 2013, the Defendant: (a) deemed that the acquisition of the instant real estate was not subject to acquisition tax reduction under Article 120(1)9 of the former Restriction of Special Taxation Act (amended by Act No. 10406, Dec. 27, 2010; (b) was amended by Act No. 11614, Jan. 1, 2013; hereinafter “new Act”); and (c) was not subject to acquisition tax reduction under Article 120(1)9 of the former Act (amended by Act No. 10406, Dec. 27, 2010; and (d) imposed acquisition tax on the Plaintiff on the Plaintiff by deeming that the said real estate is not subject to acquisition tax reduction under Article 44,460,90; (c) local education tax; (d) local education tax; and (d) special rural development tax of KRW 2,23,040,500,030 (including penalty tax).
(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). [Grounds for recognition] The Disposition in this case] is without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1 through 4 (including branch numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings.
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. Article 120(1)9 of the New Act on the Claim for Reduction and Exemption of Acquisition Tax pursuant to the interpretation of Article 120(1)9 of the Plaintiff’s Claim No. 1, does not apply only to directly succeeding or acquiring real estate from an originator or a special purpose company, but also to collect claims by acquiring real estate from the originator as security.