양도소득세부과처분취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On June 20, 2001, the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s dong B purchased 347 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) for KRW 600 million, and completed each registration of ownership transfer for 1/2 shares of the instant land.
B. On September 26, 2001, the Plaintiff newly constructed the 7th floor building on the instant land (hereinafter “instant building”) with a construction permit granted on September 26, 2001, and obtained approval for use on August 1, 2002, and completed registration of ownership preservation in the Plaintiff’s name on August 9, 2002.
C. On March 25, 2013, the Plaintiff and B sold the instant land and buildings in KRW 2.6 billion to D, and D completed the registration of ownership transfer based on sale on the same date with respect to the instant land and buildings.
On June 30, 2013, when filing a preliminary return on capital gains tax following the transfer of the instant land and building, the Plaintiff calculated the acquisition value of the instant land as KRW 308,178,00 as the actual transaction value, and calculated the acquisition value of the instant building as KRW 1,396,042,770 as the actual transaction value, and filed a return on KRW 204,180,469 as the capital gains tax accordingly.
E. The Defendant calculated the acquisition value of the building of this case as KRW 1,100,831,946, which is converted acquisition value rather than the actual transaction value, on the ground that the Plaintiff failed to submit specific documentary evidence as to the actual transaction value of the building of this case, and that the payment of the purchase price claimed by the Plaintiff was unclear, and issued a disposition imposing capital gains tax of KRW 82,684,270 for the Plaintiff in May 19, 2014 (hereinafter “instant disposition”).
F. The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and requested an inquiry to the Tax Tribunal on July 9, 2014, but the Tax Tribunal dismissed the disposition on September 19, 2014.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 5, Eul evidence 1, 2 and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The legality of disposition.
A. The plaintiff.