[양도소득세부과처분취소][공1990.9.15.(880),1811]
The case holding that it constitutes an speculative transaction under Article 72 (3) 5 of the former Regulations on the Management of Property Tax Investigation (National Tax Service Directive No. 916 of December 31, 1983) since it purchased land which was in dispute and has been partitioned during the resale process with insufficient financial standing and reselled within a short period.
The Plaintiff purchased KRW 112,737,50 on December 30, 1985 in a situation where the Plaintiff had a dispute over the process of resale and where it is possible to purchase the land in this case, which was not divided, in short of the financial standing, and then transferred KRW 217,50,000 on December 18, 1986, it constitutes an speculative transaction under Article 72(3)5 of the Regulations on the Management of Property Tax (amended by National Tax Service Directive No. 916, Dec. 31, 1983; Ordinance No. 980, Jan. 26, 1987).
Articles 23(4), 45(1), 170(4)2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act, Article 72(3)5 of the former Regulations on the Management of Property Tax;
Shin Young-ho
Head of the Southern Mine District Office
Gwangju High Court Decision 88Gu840 delivered on August 11, 1989
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.
We examine the Plaintiff’s ground of appeal.
According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below confirmed that the plaintiff purchased the land of this case from the non-party 112,737,500 won on December 30, 1985, and transferred it to the non-party 112,737,500 won on December 18, 1986 to the non-party 217,50,000 won. The court below determined that the plaintiff purchased the land of this case in the process of resale and the non-division of this case in the short term without any circumstance to obtain special payment of the land in the process of resale, and it constitutes a violation of Article 23 (4) and Article 45 (1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act and Article 170 (4) 2 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 1989, Aug. 1, 1983) and it constitutes a violation of the rules of evidence collection rules, which were enacted under the National Tax Service Directive No. 916, and the record No. 2871. 1.
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.
Justices Kim Sang-won (Presiding Justice) Lee Jong-won (Presiding Justice)