토지 취득자금 출처가 불분명하여 증여추정한 것은 적법함[국승]
Busan District Court-2012-Guhap-4983 (2013.05.09)
Seocho-2012- Busan District Court-2271 (Law No. 112, 2012)
It is legitimate that the presumption of donation was made on the ground that the source of land acquisition fund is unclear.
(1) In light of the fact that the father entered into a sales contract and received the payment of the purchase price from the donor while selling and selling the land, and that the purchaser stated that he/she did not know his/her father, a registered titleholder, and that he/she did not know his/her father, it is legitimate for his/her father to presume that
Article 2 (Gift Tax Taxables) of Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act
Busan High Court 2013Nu1485
South ○
○ Head of tax office
Busan District Court Decision 2012Guhap4983 Decided May 9, 2013
May 14, 2014
June 25, 2014
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked. The disposition of imposition of KRW 29,721,60 against the Plaintiff on August 28, 2012 by the Defendant shall be revoked.
1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;
The reasoning of the judgment made by the court for this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and therefore, it accepts it as it is in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act (the plaintiff basically repeats the same argument in the court of first instance even in the trial. Thus, even if the plaintiff examines the descriptions of evidence No. 7 through No. 10, which are newly submitted evidence by considering the allegations and reasons that the plaintiff partly supplemented in the court of first instance, the judgment
2. Conclusion
Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit.