beta
(영문) 광주고법 1971. 11. 25. 선고 71구13 제1특별부판결 : 상고

[재산세등부과처분취소청구사건][고집1971특,433]

Main Issues

Property tax-exempt property under Article 184 (1) of the Local Tax Act and relation to an application under paragraph (2) of the same Article

Summary of Judgment

Even if a religious organization uses a property directly for its intended business, it shall file an application for tax exemption pursuant to Article 184 (2) of the Local Tax Act, and if not, no property tax shall be exempted.

[Reference Provisions]

Article 184 of the Local Tax Act

Reference Cases

Supreme Court Decision 71Nu225 delivered on March 28, 1972

Plaintiff

The Foundation shall maintain the Incheon Metropolitan City Incheon Metropolitan Council, a foundation

Defendant

Gwangju Market

Text

The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Purport of claim

The Defendant’s disposition of imposition of KRW 5,604, KRW 6,368, KRW 59, KRW 59,464, KRW 9,527, and KRW 12,737, KRW 93,70, KRW 93,00, KRW 93,70, KRW 90,000, KRW 93,70,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00,000, for the year 1968.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the defendant.

Reasons

As to the Defendant’s imposition of KRW 93,70 against the Plaintiff on November 16, 1970, as stated in the purport of the claim, there is no dispute between the parties. However, as to the Plaintiff’s imposition of KRW 93,70 as to the Plaintiff’s legitimate disposition, the Plaintiff purchased the above-mentioned land for the purpose of building the major party to the central area of Gwangju City due to the project of the Incheon Metropolitan City, which was 23-1, 256, 4-1, 256, 21-3, 21-3, 21-2, 210, and 21-6, 24, 72, 363, and 72,35, and 14-1, 21-2, 34, 196, and 14-2, 196, the Plaintiff had been treated as the Plaintiff’s domestic planning tax-free land for the purpose of treating the Plaintiff’s remaining real estate as the Plaintiff’s residential building for the purpose of national tax exemption.

Therefore, the plaintiff's main claim seeking its revocation is without merit, and it is dismissed and the costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiff according to Article 14 of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 89 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Judges Choi Yong-su (Presiding Judge)