[취득세부과처분취소][집26(2)행,31;공1978.9.1.(591) 10955]
Whether the entry of property owned by a permanent resident to a foreign country constitutes acquisition by succession under Article 73 (9) of the Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act and is subject to the imposition of acquisition tax.
It cannot be deemed that goods falling under Article 46 subparagraph 23 of the Enforcement Decree of the Trade Business Act are acquired under Article 104 subparagraph 8 of the Local Tax Act, and therefore, it cannot be deemed that it constitutes acquisition by succession under Article 73 (9) of the Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act.
Article 104 subparagraph 8 of the Local Tax Act, Article 73 (9) of the Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act, Article 46 subparagraph 23 of the Enforcement Decree of the Foreign Trade Act
Attorney Lee Jae-sung, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant
Head of Gwanak-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City
Seoul High Court Decision 77Gu312 delivered on January 31, 1978
The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.
The grounds of appeal by the defendant litigant are examined.
According to the court below's decision, the issue of imposition of acquisition tax of this case is under the premise that there is no dispute between the parties and whether the entry of a permanent resident constitutes acquisition by succession of property under Article 73 (9) of the Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act is the date of acquisition by succession, and it can be said that the acquisition by succession of property under Article 73 (9) of the Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act can not be the date of acquisition by succession of property under Article 73 (9) of the same Act, and it can be said that the acquisition by succession of property under Article 104 (8) of the Local Tax Act can not be the case of entry into Korea. However, it is reasonable to interpret the court below's decision that the acquisition by transfer of property under Article 73 (9) of the same Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act, which is the date of acquisition by succession of property under Article 73 (1) of the same Act, for the purpose of acquisition by transfer of property under Article 73 (4) of the same Act, as well as the purport of the Local Tax Act's No. 10 (3).
Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant who has lost, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.
Justices Presiding Justice (Presiding Justice)