The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

1. The provisions of Article 3-3 (5) of the former Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption Act (wholly amended by Act No. 3481, Dec. 31, 1981) stipulate that the land in the aggregate housing district shall be transferred to the Korea National Housing Corporation or the implementer of the relevant aggregate housing district development project (hereinafter referred to as the “development project operator”) for the housing construction site as prescribed by the Presidential Decree, only if the purchaser of the land files an application as prescribed by the Presidential Decree, the income tax or the special surtax shall be exempted, and Article 2-4 (1) and (2) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act (Presidential Decree No. 8844, Feb. 8, 1978) provides that the above aggregate housing site refers to an apartment house as provided in Article 2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Building Construction Promotion Act (house constructed by ordinary people) and Article 2-3 (3) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act (Act No. 9232, Dec. 30, 1978) provides that the relevant land shall be transferred or exempted from the date under paragraph (3).

2. In light of the purport of the above provisions, the tax reduction and exemption system under Article 3-3 (5) of the former Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption Act provides that in order to facilitate the supply of apartment construction sites in the size of low-income housing to the development project operator who has transferred land within the apartment zone to the general housing construction project operator for ordinary housing in order to facilitate the supply of apartment construction sites in the size of low-income housing, benefits from tax reduction and exemption are granted. In granting such benefits of tax reduction and exemption, the time when the land transfer is transferred to the transferee is designated as the development project operator and there is no reasonable ground to deal differently depending on the approval after the transfer, and Article 21 (2) of the Housing Construction Promotion Act and Article 24 subparagraph 1 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act provide that the housing construction project operator designated pursuant to Article 8 of the same Act may be designated as a development project operator if he owns more than 1/4 of the area of land in the apartment zone. If it is interpreted that only if it is transferred to the person designated as the development project operator, it is expected that the housing construction project operator will be supplied to the general housing construction project operator.

3. Thus, the tax reduction and exemption under Article 3-3 (5) of the former Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption Act shall be deemed to include not only the case where the land is transferred to the designated development project operator, but also the case where the development project operator designated and then the transferee completed the application for tax reduction and exemption as prescribed by the Presidential Decree. Article 2-4 (3) and (4) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act does not distinguish it according to the purport of this mother Act, but also the procedure for applying for tax reduction and exemption is prescribed. Thus, the judgment of the court below is just in holding that even if the plaintiff sold the land to the Hanyang Housing Co., Ltd. which intends to construct the ordinary housing by obtaining the designation of the development project operator, the above Hanyang Housing was designated as a development project operator, and even if the application for corporate tax and special surtax was filed within the period as prescribed in Article 2-4 (3) of the same Act, even if the income accrued from the transfer of the land of this case is subject to exemption under Article 3-3 (5) of the same Act, and thus the defendant's disposition for tax reduction and exemption is unlawful.

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

Justices Jeong Jong-tae (Presiding Justice)