(영문) 수원지방법원 2008. 12. 05. 선고 2008구단2273 판결취득가액으로 지급하였다고 주장하는 금액을 부인한 처분이 정당한지 여부[국승]
Whether a disposition denying the amount claimed to have been made as acquisition value is legitimate;
It is argued that the total amount of the rental deposit included in the acquisition value is not clear, and that the cash held the down payment and the intermediate payment is paid only, which is close to 300 million won, and that the statement made by the transaction party on the transaction details is inconsistent with each other, and that the denial is legitimate.
The contents of the decision shall be the same as attached.
Article 94 (Scope of Transfer Income Tax of the Gu)
Article 95 (Transfer Income Amount under the former Income Tax Act)
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The Defendant’s disposition of imposition of KRW 188,861,490 on August 24, 2007, including capital gains tax, additional dues and increased additional dues, against the Plaintiff, shall be revoked.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On December 2, 2002, the Plaintiff acquired a building of 308 square meters of ○○○○○○○○○○-2 site, 23 square meters of 00-2 site, 8 square meters of 0-3 road and its ground (hereinafter “real estate in this case”) from the private interest, in order to transfer it to the private interest, on June 25, 2003, and made a preliminary return on the tax base of capital gains tax to the Defendant on the actual transaction value (transfer value of 450 million won, acquisition value of 434,00,000).
B. On August 2, 2007, on the ground that the Plaintiff’s preliminary return was false, the Defendant calculated the transfer value as KRW 1.2 billion and the acquisition value as KRW 8.3 billion and notified the transfer income tax of KRW 181,249,041 for the year 2003.
[Reasons for Recognition] Uncontentious Facts, Evidence No. 1 to No. 4, All purports of pleadings
2. The legality of disposition.
(a) Related statutes;
Article 94 (Scope of Transfer Income Tax of the Gu)
Article 95 (Transfer Income Amount under the former Income Tax Act)
Article 96 (Value of Transfer)
Article 100 (Calculation of Gains from Transfer of Gu Income Tax)
Article 114 (Determination, Revision and Notification of Tax Base and Amount of Tax for Transfer Income)
B. The plaintiff's assertion
The Plaintiff asserts to the effect that the Defendant’s disposition of this case, which did not recognize it, was unlawful even though 80 million won in the down payment, 280 million won in the intermediate payment, and 89 million won in the remainder payment, were paid to ○○○○ in the down payment, and 1.8 billion won in the remainder payment.
C. Determination
On the other hand, the following facts are presented: Gap evidence 5-2, 3-2, and the witness's statement that correspond to the plaintiff's argument, the plaintiff made a consistent statement that the lease deposit is KRW 14,200,000 or KRW 80,000,000,000, and the civil interest is merely KRW 500,000,000,000,000,000,000,0000,000,0000,0000,0000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00,000,00,00,00,00.
3. Conclusion
Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit.