취득세등 경정거부처분 취소
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 May 22, 2013, the Plaintiff acquired B Apartment No. 101-2704 (hereinafter “instant apartment”). On May 22, 2013, the Plaintiff reported and paid acquisition tax of KRW 46,762,00, local education tax of KRW 4,676,20, and special rural development tax of KRW 56,893,760 (hereinafter “instant acquisition tax, etc.”) to the Defendant.
B. On September 8, 2015, the Plaintiff asserted that “The instant apartment was sold in the name of the Plaintiff, who is the seat of the Plaintiff, and completed the registration of ownership transfer in 2009, and restored the title trust in 2013 and restored to the Plaintiff’s name. Since the Plaintiff paid acquisition tax, registration tax, etc. when the Plaintiff acquired the name of the first title trustee, it is double taxation if the acquisition tax, etc. should be paid even when the acquisition tax, etc. is recovered in the name of the Plaintiff.” The Plaintiff returned the acquisition tax, etc
C. As to this, the Defendant rejected the Plaintiff’s claim for correction on November 2, 2015, on the ground that “A title trust agreement between the Plaintiff and C becomes a contracting party, and constitutes a contractual title trust that enters into a sales contract with the seller. In this case, upon transfer of ownership in the name of C, C bears the obligation to pay acquisition tax by acquiring the status to externally dispose of the instant apartment, and even when ownership in the future of the Plaintiff is transferred thereafter, the Plaintiff assumes the obligation to pay acquisition tax by newly acquiring the instant real estate, and thus, the Plaintiff is not subject to double taxation.”
(hereinafter “instant disposition”) D.
Accordingly, on December 31, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a request with the Tax Tribunal for a tax trial, but was dismissed on June 30, 2016.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 8, 9, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the concept of acquisition under the Local Tax Act is de facto the Local Tax Act.