취득세부과처분취소
1. All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.
Purport of claim and appeal
1.
1. The reasoning of the court’s explanation as to this case is as follows: (a) the Defendants’ explanation is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the Defendants added a new or new judgment on the allegations in paragraph (2). As such, the reasoning of the court’s explanation as to this case is in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of
2. Additional determination
A. The Defendants’ assertion 1) The provision that is exempt from taxation on the acquisition of the State under the Local Tax Act ought to be interpreted only to the effect that it is non-taxation, and the provision that is applied only to the scope of activities as the subject of private economy. Since the acquisition of the instant shares itself was engaged in profit-making activities as the subject of private economy, the provision on non-taxation of acquisition tax should not be applied. 2) In determining the person liable to pay deemed acquisition tax on oligopolistic shareholders, the determination of the person liable to pay tax should be based on the actual controlling right of the relevant shares, i.e., the person holding voting rights., the Plaintiff, other than the State,
B. 1) Article 9(1) of the former Local Tax Act only provides that "no acquisition tax shall be imposed on the acquisition of the State," but it does not distinguish the nature of the object of taxation from the nature of the object of taxation. This part of the Defendants' assertion is without merit, since there is no ground or necessity to apply differently the non-taxation depending on the type or nature of the object of taxation. 2) The Plaintiff's business of managing and operating the National Pension Fund is entrusted by the Minister of Health and Welfare, who is the managing and operating entity of the Fund, pursuant to Articles 25 and 102 of the National Pension Act and Article 76 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act. The legal effect of the business belongs to the State represented by