beta
(영문) 서울고등법원 2018. 01. 23. 선고 2017누64332 판결

증여받은 자산을 매도한 경우 환산취득가액이 아닌 증여일 당시 상증세법에 따라 평가한 가액을 양도소득세 취득가액으로 삼은 처분은 적법함[국승]

Case Number of the immediately preceding lawsuit

Seoul Administrative Court-2016-Gu Group-25300 ( October 12, 2017)

Case Number of the previous trial

Cho High Court Decision 2016No2085 (Law No. 16.30)

Title

Where donated assets are sold, a disposition to regard the value assessed under the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act as the acquisition value of capital gains tax at the time of donation other than the conversion value.

Summary

In principle, the acquisition value of capital gains tax shall be calculated based on the actual transaction value, and in the case of selling apartment acquired with the right to sell in lots, the value assessed under the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act as of the date of donation, not the converted value

Related statutes

Article 97 of the Income Tax Act; Article 163 of the Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act;

Cases

2018Nu6432 Revocation of disposition of imposing capital gains tax

Plaintiff

annualA

Defendant

O Head of tax office

Conclusion of Pleadings

January 09, 2018

Imposition of Judgment

January 23, 2018

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked. The imposition of the capital gains tax belonging to ○○○○○, ○○, and ○○○○○ (including additional taxes) on the Plaintiff on March 24, 2016 by the Defendant shall be revoked.

Reasons

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasons why the court shall state in this case are the second Ampha of the judgment of the court of first instance (hereinafter referred to as "the second Ampha of the judgment").

T. The reason for the decision of the court of first instance is the same as that for the decision of the court of first instance, except that the term "T." is "the apartment of this case" as "the apartment of this case". Thus, it is cited in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence

2. Conclusion

Therefore, the judgment of the first instance court is justifiable, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit.