beta
(영문) 대법원 1985. 7. 23. 선고 84누590 판결

[양도소득세부과처분취소][공1985.9.15.(760),1195]

Main Issues

Whether the cost of housing site development constitutes necessary expenses deductible from the transfer value (affirmative)

Summary of Judgment

In the event that embanking work and construction work for reinforced concrete building are performed to dispose of a site with severe slope as a flat, the expenses required for such construction work are the necessary expenses to be deducted from the transfer value as the improvement expenses under Article 45 (1) 2 of the Income Tax Act and Article 94 (2) 2 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act.

[Reference Provisions]

Article 45 (1) 2 of the Income Tax Act, Article 94 (2) 2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act

Plaintiff-Appellee

Plaintiff

Defendant-Appellant

Head of Southern District Tax Office

Judgment of the lower court

Seoul High Court Decision 83Gu929 delivered on July 20, 1984

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal by the defendant litigant are examined.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below acknowledged that the plaintiff completed the embling work and the installation work of reinforced concrete building by bringing about 5,062,765 won from April 1, 1979 to April 30 of the same year in order to dispose of the site of this case with severe slope in flat, and based on the evidence adopted by the court below, and held that the expenses for the creation of housing sites constitute necessary expenses to be deducted from the transfer value as improvement expenses under Article 45 (1) 2 of the Income Tax Act and Article 94 (2) 2 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, and there is no error of law such as misconception of facts due to a violation of the rules of evidence, such as theory of lawsuit, etc.

Therefore, we cannot accept this issue, since it is found that the court below erred in the deliberation of evidence and fact-finding belonging to the exclusive authority.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices O Sung-sung(Presiding Justice)