이 사건 토지는 합병후 분할하여 양도하는 경우로 양도자산의 필지별 구분이 가능하므로 그 취득시기는 지분별로 안분하는 것이 아님[국승]
Cheongju District Court-2015-Gu Partnership-320 ( October 08, 2015)
The land in this case can be divided by lots of transferred assets in the case of transfer by division after the merger, so the time of acquisition is not divided by shares.
(The same as the judgment of the first instance court) If a parcel of land is transferred in installments after the consolidation, the case of dividing the acquisition time by share falls under a case where the classification is unclear, and it is impossible to recognize that the provision of reduction or exemption is expanded even in the case where the classification is obvious by the cadastral map.
Daejeon High Court (ju) 2015Nu11241 Revocation of Disposition of Imposing capital gains tax;
00
00. Head of tax office
Cheongju District Court Decision 2015Guhap320 decided October 08, 2015
2016.07.20
2016.09.07
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The judgment of the first instance is revoked. The defendant's disposition of imposition of KRW 000 on July 9, 2014 against the plaintiff on July 9, 2014 is revoked.
The reasoning of the court's reasoning on this case is as follows: "The transfer of land to be transferred to a neighboring non-self-owned land to meet the requirements for reduction and exemption of capital gains tax under the Act on Special Cases concerning Taxation" in Articles 5 and 18-20 of the judgment of the court of first instance does not transfer the part meeting the requirements for reduction and exemption under the Act on Special Cases concerning Taxation for at least eight years from among the land of one parcel, the location and area of which the acquisition time differs, and the part meeting the requirements for reduction and exemption under the Act on Special Cases concerning Taxation is not transferred, but rather, the part meeting the requirements for reduction and exemption under the Act on Special Cases concerning Taxation is the same as the entry in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the case where the part belonging to the scope to which the heavy taxation provisions apply
Therefore, the judgment of the court of first instance is legitimate, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.