beta
(영문) 대구고등법원 2016.10.14 2016누4004

양도소득세부과처분취소

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The plaintiff's claim extended in the trial is dismissed.

3...

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff, on April 29, 2004, transferred the instant real estate to D (hereinafter “instant transfer”) a building of 172 square meters in Daegu Jung-gu B, 172 square meters, the above ground buildings and 63 square meters in Daegu-gu, and the above ground buildings (hereinafter collectively referred to as “instant real estate”). On June 30, 2004, the transfer value of the instant real estate was KRW 390,000,000, the calculated tax amount was KRW 54,536,514, and the amount of tax to be voluntarily paid was KRW 49,082,863, and paid the transfer income tax for the year 204 (hereinafter “instant report”).

B. From May 1, 2013 to September 19, 2013, the Defendant investigated the difference between the transfer value of the instant real estate reported by the Plaintiff and D’s acquisition value as of September 27, 2012, and confirmed the actual transfer value of the instant real estate as at the time of the instant transfer as at the time of the instant transfer, and deemed the acquisition value as KRW 710,00,00,00, and deemed the transfer value as at 204,174,924, which is the conversion value based on the standard market price at the time of the acquisition, as at July 4, 2013, the Plaintiff’s tax base for capital gains tax of 2004 as at 348,563,406, and the total determined tax amount as at 171,603,098 (calculated calculated tax amount as KRW 113,782,826,820,272), and disposed of less than 54,53636,517

C. On August 21, 2013, the Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition, filed an objection with the commissioner of the Daegu Regional Tax Office on August 21, 2013, and the objection was dismissed on October 2, 2013, the Plaintiff filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal on December 26, 2013, and the Tax Tribunal dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim on November 6, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 8, 9, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 4, 9, 11, and 12, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion 1) The former Income Tax Act (amended by Act No. 7289 of Dec. 31, 2004; hereinafter the same applies)

According to the main sentence of Article 96(1), the transfer value of assets for the calculation of transfer income tax shall be the transfer value.

참조조문