A. On December 13, 1948, the Plaintiff is a non-profit corporation established for the purpose of preserving and managing the literature and property of Confucian Schools within the OO, conducting education and edification business, opening lectures, academic lessons, etc., promoting Confucian schools, and developing culture.

B. The Plaintiff sold OOO-dong OO-dong OO-dong OO-dong (hereinafter “instant land”) to AA, and reported and paid the disposal profits from the Plaintiff’s profit as tension income from the Plaintiff’s profit-making business. 20 XX.X. 2013 corporate tax O-O(the corporate tax related to the disposal profits of the instant land is O-O-car) to the Defendant.

C. On February 12, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a claim for correction with the Defendant to reduce the amount of KRW 0,000,00,000, which is the case where the instant land is used directly for the proper purpose business as stipulated in the statutes or the articles of incorporation for three or more consecutive years as of the date of disposal of the relevant fixed assets as stipulated in Article 3(3)5 of the Corporate Tax Act and Article 2(2) of the Enforcement Decree of the Corporate Tax Act.

D. On April 9, 2015, the Defendant deemed that the instant land does not constitute fixed assets used directly for the Plaintiff’s proper purpose business for at least three consecutive years as of the date of disposal, and rendered a decision to dismiss the Plaintiff’s request for correction on the ground that the instant land disposal benefits fall under the scope of taxable income under Article 3 of the Corporate Tax Act (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

E. On July 9, 2015, the Plaintiff asserted for adjudication against the Director of the Tax Tribunal on July 9, 2015, but the said claim was dismissed on October 5, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 through 3 (including branch numbers for those with additional numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), entry of Eul evidence 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The Plaintiff is a non-profit corporation under the Confucian School Property Act and its affiliated AA is a kind of religious organization and academic research organization that spreads teaching bridge and conducts research of teaching culture, and has leased the instant land and used the proceeds therefrom for the proper purpose business of AAA. Since the instant land constitutes the land within the boundaries of AA, it can be deemed that the instant land was used for the proper purpose business of the Plaintiff. Therefore, the Defendant’s disposition of the instant land cannot be deemed as an income subject to the imposition of corporate tax pursuant to Article 3(3)5 of the Corporate Tax Act and Article 2(2) of the Enforcement Decree of the Corporate Tax Act.

B. Relevant statutes

It is as shown in the attached Form.

C. Determination

1) The phrase "use of the real estate for a nonprofit business operator" means that the purpose of use of the real estate in question is directly used for a nonprofit business operator's own business, and the scope of "use of the real estate for the nonprofit business" should be objectively determined on the basis of the actual usage relationship in light of the purpose of use and acquisition by the nonprofit business operator in question (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Da58901, Dec. 23, 2005). In addition, the phrase "use of the real estate directly for the proper purpose business for more than three consecutive years as of the date of disposal of the fixed asset in question" is "use for the proper purpose business

2) As of the date of disposal of the instant land, there is no proof as to whether the Plaintiff used the instant land as the Plaintiff’s proper purpose business for more than three years, and rather, the instant land was de facto closed farmland since 2000. Thus, it cannot be deemed that the instant land was used for the Plaintiff’s proper purpose business for more than three consecutive years as of the date of disposal of the relevant fixed assets. Furthermore, the land used directly for the Plaintiff’s proper purpose business itself, i.e., teaching ceremony, the conduct of teaching staff, and education for the trainees, means the land used as the site of the Confucian school, and the land used for the facilities installed for the purpose of carrying out the proper purpose business. Thus, even if the instant land was actually used as leased farmland as alleged by the Plaintiff, it is merely a mere use of the instant land for the farmland rental business, not for the proper purpose business, and it does not change even if the leased income received from a third party was used for the purpose business of AA.

Furthermore, in order to determine whether the land of this case is within the border of AA, the land must have close connection with AA, geographical and spatially, and according to the purport of the respective descriptions or images and arguments in the Evidence Nos. 5, 6, and 3 through 5 of AA, the land of this case is located at least 650 meters away from the location of AA to the straight line between the road and the road, and it can be known that the land of this case was closed after around 200. Thus, it cannot be deemed that the land of this case falls under the land or its surrounding land within the boundary of AA, which is necessary for the teaching ceremony of AA, the performance of teaching staff, and the education of the trainee, namely, the land necessary for the education of the trainee.

3) Therefore, the Defendant’s instant disposition based on the same premise is lawful, and the Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.