취득세 등 부과처분 취소청구의 소
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The first instance court.
1. The reasons for the court's explanation concerning this case are as follows: "property education tax" in the third 7th 7th th 7th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th, “42 days”; "public interest" in the 19th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th.
2. Additional matters to be determined;
A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff did not take any particular measure with respect to the collection of acquisition tax even after one year from the date of acquisition of the Plaintiff’s land in this case, and thus exempted acquisition tax by recognizing the Plaintiff’s justifiable grounds for the imposition of acquisition tax. The Plaintiff asserted to the effect that, even though reliance on this, the Defendant imposed the acquisition tax in this case against the above public opinion list, it violates the principle of trust protection.
B. Generally, in order to apply the principle of protecting trust to the tax authority’s act in a tax law relationship, the tax authority should name the public opinion that is the subject of trust to the taxpayer, and the taxpayer’s trust in the tax authority’s explanation should not be attributable to the taxpayer, and what is the taxpayer’s explanation should be trusted, and what is the taxpayer’s interest should be infringed by the tax authority’s disposition against the statement of opinion.