beta
광주지방법원 2017.06.15 2016구단12168

취득세등경정거부처분취소

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Details of disposition;

A. On or around July 2004, the Plaintiff is designated as the developer of the development project of the development project of the Mayang-do Free Economic Zone in the Mayang-do-U.S.-U.-U.S.-U.-U.S.-U.-U.S.-U.-U.S.-U.-U.S. Free Economic Zone (multi-U.S.-U.-U.S.-U.-U.S.-U.-U.S.-U.-U.S.-U.-U.S.-U.S.-U.-U.S.-U.-U.

B. From April 26, 2012 to November 18, 2014, the Plaintiff acquired the land of 596,195 square meters and buildings of 3,493.77 square meters (hereinafter “instant real estate”) from 18 Donnam-do, which were incorporated into the said Donyang-si area, and 265 mix 596,195 m2,493.77 m2. Pursuant to Article 121-2(4)1 of the former Restriction of Special Taxation Act (Amended by Act No. 12583, Dec. 23, 2014) and Article 7(1) of the former Ordinance on the Reduction and Exemption of Local Education Tax (Amended by Act No. 12583, Dec. 23, 2014; 46,458,49,839, and thereafter deducted the amount of tax reduction and exemption from the amount of tax reduction and exemption.

C. On September 3, 2015, the Plaintiff asserted that the instant real estate constitutes real estate acquired by a tourism complex development project implementer under Article 54 of the former Act on Special Cases concerning Local Taxes (Amended by Act No. 12955, Dec. 31, 2014) and Article 6 of the former Ordinance on Tax Reduction and Exemption (hereinafter “Seoul-do Ordinance on Tax Reduction and Exemption”) to implement a tourism complex development project, and filed a claim for rectification with the Defendant by asserting that it constitutes subject to reduction and exemption by 100%. D. Accordingly, the Defendant is deemed to have obtained approval of a tourism complex development plan under Article 54 of the Tourism Promotion Act pursuant to Article 11(1)13 of the Free Economic Zone Act on November 1, 2015.