beta
(영문) 대법원 1984. 1. 24. 선고 83누346 판결

[양도소득세부과처분취소][집32(1)특,169;공1984.3.15.(724) 382]

Main Issues

Whether the transferor of land deducts the amount equivalent to the refund of the actual land tax before the transfer income tax is paid;

Summary of Judgment

Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 130-3 (4) of the former Income Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 9900, Jul. 11, 1980) where a transferor of land constructs a building on the land before the expiration of the period for filing the final return of transfer income tax base and then the transferor of land is entitled to make payment after deducting the amount equivalent to the relevant refund tax amount from the relevant transfer income tax amount to be paid voluntarily by filing a final return of transfer income tax base during the period for filing the final return of transfer income tax base, and an application for refund of land tax from the relevant amount of transfer income tax to be paid voluntarily. In this case, the portion corresponding to the relevant refund tax amount of transfer income tax amount shall be deemed reduced or exempted.

[Reference Provisions]

Article 78-3 of the former Income Tax Act; Article 130-3 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act

Plaintiff-Appellee

Plaintiff

Defendant-Appellant

Head of Public Tax Office

Judgment of the lower court

Seoul High Court Decision 82Gu937 delivered on May 18, 1983

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined.

(1) According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below held that the plaintiff acquired and owned the 1211 square meters of Chungcheongnamnam ( Address omitted) on November 25, 197 and transferred it to the non-party and the non-party and the non-party and 27 on September 11, 1980, and that the transferee constructed a tenement house on the above land and completed it on November 25 of the same year. Thus, the court below did not err in the misapprehension of the rules of evidence, such as the theory of lawsuit, in light of the records.

(2) The purport of the provision of Article 78-3 of the former Income Tax Act (Act No. 3175, Dec. 28, 1979) and Article 130-3 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act (Presidential Decree No. 9900, Jul. 11, 1980) is as follows: (a) in cases where a land transferee constructs a specific building within 3 years in order to prevent real estate speculation by inducing an end user to own the land; (b) by checking that a non-user owns the land for the purpose of speculation, the land owner would be entitled to reduction or exemption of capital gains tax equivalent to the actual refund amount by deducting an amount equivalent to 50 percent of the capital gains tax paid by the land transferor from the final return for transfer income tax base and voluntary payment of the tax base for transfer income tax (see Articles 95 and 96 of the same Act) for the period for which the purchaser did not make a final return for transfer income tax (see Article 100 of the same Act) within the scope of 130-10 of the total amount of transfer income tax to be paid by the Plaintiff.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Jeong Tae-tae (Presiding Justice)