계속 반복적으로 오피스텔을 신축 매도한 행위는 사업소득에 해당됨[국승]
Seoul High Court 2008Nu19354 ( December 09, 2008)
continuous and repeated sale of officetels constitutes business income.
The act of newly building and selling officetels is deemed to constitute real estate sales business under the Income Tax Act, with continuity and repetition to the extent that it can be seen as business activities for the purpose of profit, and thus, the defendant's disposition of this case is legitimate on the premise that the transfer margin of officetels in this case is business income.
The contents of the decision shall be the same as attached.
쇠지지 지은은 3000 개은은은은은 3000 아은은은은은은은은 3000 아은은은은은 3000 아은은은은 3000 아은은 3000 이 3000209 headal 546
쇠지지300 쇠지지지지 3000 개지지지 3000 개지지지지지 3000 Austria
쇠지지 300 쇠지지지 3000 지지지지지지지
Article 300 gross u300 gross u3000 gross u3000 gross u3000 Seoul High Court Decision 2008Nu19354 decided December 9, 2008
쇠은은 지지 개은은 이 3000 개은은은 3000 개가은은은은은 3000 이 개이 3000 아은이 11, 1010
44 44 44 44 44 45 44 444 64 44
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.
쇠鹬 쇠鹬 3000 쇠鹬 3000
The grounds of appeal are examined.
Whether the income from the transfer of real estate is business income or capital gains under the Income Tax Act shall be determined according to the ordinary social norms, considering the transferor’s acquisition and holding of real estate, whether the transfer is made, whether the transfer aims at profit, the scale and frequency of the transfer, the mode, and the continuity and repetition of business activities to the extent that it can be seen as business activities. In making such determination, not only the transfer of real estate concerned but also the transfer of real estate owned by the transferor should be taken into account in all the circumstances before and after the time the transfer took place (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 83Nu66, Sept. 11, 1984; 9Du5412, Apr. 24, 2001).
The lower court determined that the Plaintiff’s act of newly constructing and selling the instant officetel in light of various circumstances, including the developments leading up to the construction, lease and sale of the instant officetel, its holding period, and sales size, etc., constitutes real estate sales business under the Income Tax Act, and thus, deemed as constituting a real estate sales business under the Income Tax Act, and that the Defendant’s disposition of this case was legitimate on the premise that the instant officetel’s transfer margin is business income. In light of the aforementioned legal principles and records, the lower court’s determination is justifiable, and contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, there were no errors in the misapprehension of
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.
Dan 300 Mau300 Mau 3000 Mau Mau 3000 Mau300
Justices Yinu300 Mau300 Mau3000 Dol-is-is-is-is-is-is-is-is-is-is-is-is-is-is-is-is-is-
Justices Yinu300 Mau300 Mau3000 Dol-is-is-is-is-is-is-is-is-is-is-is-is-is-is-is-is-is-
Dan 300 Ma3000 Ma3000 Mau300 Man Mau3000 Don Dol33000 Dol-is-is-is-is-is-is-is-is-is-is-is-is-is-is-