beta
(영문) 서울고등법원 1993. 07. 20. 선고 93구663 판결

양도차익 무신고자에 대한 기준시가 과세 적정 여부[국승]

Title

Whether the standard market price imposed on any person who reports capital gains is appropriate

Summary

If the actual transaction value of documentary evidence submitted by the transferor up to the final return period is confirmed, it shall be calculated on the basis of the standard market price, but if it is not reported, it is legitimate to calculate the gains on transfer

The decision

The contents of the decision shall be the same as attached.

Summary of Judgment

I did not have any aptitude.

Text

The plaintiff's claim is dismissed. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Details of taxation disposition

원고가 ㅇㅇ시 ㅇㅇ구 ㅇㅇ동 366 및 같은동 362의 1 답 총 3051평방미터의 3051분의 1017(이하 이 사건 토지라고만 한다)을 1989. 6. 9.취득하였다가 1990. 4. 26.양도한 사실, 원고가 위 양도후 소득세법 제95조 소정의 기간내에 자산차익예정신고를 하지 아니하자 피고가 이사건 토지의 취득 및 양도당시의 기준시가에 의하여 위 양도차익을 금21,320,974원으로 산정하고 그에 따라 원고에게 청구취지 기재와 같은 이 사건 과세처분을 한 사실은 당사자사이에 다툼이 없다.

2. The legality of taxation disposition

According to Articles 23 (4) and 45 (1) 1 of the Income Tax Act (amended by Act No. 4281 of Dec. 31, 1990), the value at the time of transfer and acquisition of assets shall be calculated based on the standard market price at the time of transfer and acquisition of assets, and in cases prescribed by the Presidential Decree, it shall be calculated based on the actual transaction price of assets. According to Article 170 (4) 3 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 13194 of Dec. 31, 1990) of the same Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 13194 of Dec. 31, 1990), where the transferor can verify the actual transaction price at the time of acquisition and transfer by documentary evidence submitted by the transferor under Article 95 or 100 of the same Act, even if there is no profit margin from transfer or sale or loss, and therefore, it shall be determined based on the standard market price at least when the transferor can verify the actual transaction price by the transfer price or transfer margin.

The plaintiff is the person who did not make a final return on the profits accruing from the transfer or the final return on the transfer of the land of this case within the statutory period on the ground that there was no transfer marginal profit. Accordingly, the defendant's measure of calculating the transfer marginal profit by the standard market price at the time of the acquisition and transfer of the land of this case is justified and the plaintiff's assertion that the acquisition and transfer

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case seeking revocation because the tax disposition of this case was unlawful, is without merit, and it is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the plaintiff as the losing party.