종합부동산세부과처분취소 등
1. Of the instant lawsuit, imposition of comprehensive real estate holding tax in 201 652,531,590 won and special rural development tax of 130,50,506,310 won are based on each disposition.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On December 30, 2002, the Plaintiff acquired the ownership of B large 14,452.4 square meters (hereinafter “B”) in Gyeyang-gu, Incheon. On November 8, 2012, the Plaintiff transferred B land to the Medical Center Benefits Foundation on November 8, 2012.
B. The head of Gyeyang-gu Incheon Metropolitan City (hereinafter referred to as the “Yyang-gu head of Gyeyang-gu”) determined on February 10, 201 that “10,787.4 square meters out of the B land constitutes aggregate taxation” and notified the Defendant of the taxation data by correcting the property tax in 2007 or 2010.
C. (1) Accordingly, on November 16, 201, the Defendant imposed imposition of comprehensive real estate tax, special rural development tax (hereinafter referred to as “comprehensive real estate tax, etc.”) on November 201, 201, including the details of imposition of comprehensive real estate tax, special rural development tax (hereinafter referred to as “comprehensive real estate tax, etc.”), imposition of comprehensive real estate tax, etc. on November 1, 201 through 201, and imposition of comprehensive real estate tax, etc. on November 16, 2012, including comprehensive real estate tax, etc. on November 16, 2012.
(2) The Plaintiff was dissatisfied with the disposition of imposition of comprehensive real estate holding tax in 2007 to 2010, and 2012, and filed an appeal on January 22, 2013. On October 4, 2013, the Plaintiff was dismissed by the Tax Tribunal.
(1) On January 2, 2014, the Defendant issued a disposition of comprehensive real estate holding tax in 2013, including the details of the disposition of taxation, to the Plaintiff.
(2) The Plaintiff appealed and filed an appeal on January 8, 2014, but was dismissed by the Tax Tribunal on March 26, 2014.
[Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 3 (including additional numbers), Eul evidence 1 to 8 (including additional numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination on this safety defense
A. The Defendant’s assertion is unlawful since the Plaintiff did not go through the procedure of the previous trial on the disposition of comprehensive real estate holding tax in 201.
(b)(1) Determinations is made in the phased development process by two or more administrative dispositions for the same purpose in tax administration.