beta
(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.01.15 2014구단2489

양도소득세등부과처분취소

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff acquired the Plaintiff’s housing located in Young-gu, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, by entering into a purchase contract with the Plaintiff for KRW 483,221,00 on Apr. 28, 201, after having been confirmed on December 11, 2007 by the Gyeonggi-do Urban Corporation as the Plaintiff’s housing site development zone was incorporated into the C Housing Site Development Zone.

Then, on May 11, 201, the Plaintiff transferred the instant sales right to E.

B. The Plaintiff reported the transfer income tax on the sales right of this case to the Defendant at KRW 483,221,00,000, which is the same price as the purchase price, by reporting the transfer income tax on the sales right of this case to the Defendant.

C. As a result of a field investigation around June 2013, the Defendant: (a) deemed that the Plaintiff received a separate payment of KRW 190,000 from the premium when it transfers the sales right of this case; and (b) on September 6, 2013, the Plaintiff issued the instant disposition that corrected and notified the transfer income tax of KRW 83,097,00 (including additional tax) for the Plaintiff for the year 2011.

The Plaintiff filed a tax appeal on December 6, 2013, but was dismissed on April 21, 2014.

[Reasons for Recognition] The entry of evidence Nos. 2 and 3 and the purport of the whole pleading

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The plaintiff's assertion that he had already transferred the above house owned by the plaintiff to F on February 2, 2004, which is entitled to acquire the sales right of this case, and F transferred the house to F before and finally acquired E, but it is merely a preparation of a sales contract as if the plaintiff transferred the house directly to E.

Therefore, since the Plaintiff did not actually receive the above transfer margin from E, the instant disposition is unlawful under the principle of substantial taxation.

B. In full view of the evidence Nos. 2, 7 through 10, and the overall purport of testimony and pleading of witnesses E, the Plaintiff acquired the sales right of this case from the Gyeonggi-do Si Corporation in the amount of KRW 483,221,00 as above and then acquired the sales right of this case from E with the sales right of KRW 190,000,000.