[등록세등부과처분취소][공1988.5.1.(823),713]
(a) Whether an investment finance corporation has become subject to heavy taxation of registration tax in cases where the registration of temporary ownership transfer is completed in a way to recover bad debts;
B. Whether Article 102 (2) of the Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act (Presidential Decree No. 11751) (Presidential Decree No. 11751) exceeds the scope of delegation under Article 138 (3) of the Local Tax Act as the mother corporation
(a) Unless an Investment Finance Corporation has completed the registration of ownership transfer of real estate in the future within five years after its incorporation, it shall not be excluded from subject matter of heavy taxation of registration tax on the ground that the registration was made temporarily as a means to recover bad debts arising in connection with the act of credit which is the business of the corporation.
B. The provisions of Article 102 (2) of the Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act (Presidential Decree No. 11751, Aug. 26, 1985) shall not be deemed to be the invalid provision which is contrary to the mother law or goes beyond the scope of delegation as stipulated by the delegation provision of Article 138 (3) of the Local Tax Act.
(a) Article 138(1)3 of the Local Tax Act, Article 102(2)2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act (Presidential Decree No. 11751, Aug. 26, 1985); Article 138(3) of the Local Tax Act; Article 102(2) of the Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act (Presidential Decree No. 11751, Aug. 26, 1985);
Attorney Seo Young-il, et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant
Head of Nam-gu Seoul Metropolitan City
Daegu High Court Decision 1987.7.7.1, 87Gu72
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.
As to the ground of appeal by the Plaintiff’s attorney:
According to the decision of the court below, the plaintiff established on May 2, 1983 and established its principal office in 126, Jung-gu, Daegu-dong, Daegu-dong, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of successful bid. According to the provisions of Article 138 (1) 3 of the Local Tax Act, the tax rate shall be five times the pertinent tax rate under Article 131 of the same Act, and Article 102 (2) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 11751 of Aug. 26, 1985) of the same Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 11751 of the same Act) provides that "real estate registration" after the incorporation of a corporation referred to in subparagraph 3 of Article 102 of the same Act refers to all real estate registration of non-business purpose, non-business purpose, or non-business purpose which are acquired within five years after the incorporation of the corporation, and since the incorporation of the corporation, the provision of the above provision concerning the registration of ownership transfer cannot be established within 5 years after its establishment.
In the same purport, the judgment of the court below which rejected the plaintiff's assertion is just and there is no error of law such as the theory
The issue is groundless.
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.
Justices Yoon In-bok (Presiding Justice)