종합부동산세등부과처분취소
The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. From 2014 to 2015, the Plaintiff owned a house (a house bearing a serial number 1, 200, hereinafter referred to as a “manytel,” and a house bearing a serial number 2, 3, hereinafter referred to as a “perytel,” and a serial number 9, 10, hereinafter referred to as a “perytel”).
In the case of houses entered in serial 7, the plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer on August 17, 2012 due to the sale by voluntary auction.
B. As to the house, the Defendant, as seen in Section 1 of the Gross Real Estate Tax (hereinafter “instant Comprehensive Real Estate Tax”) for the taxable period in 2014 and 2015, omitted the serial number 7, which the Plaintiff acquired as seen in Section 1 of each week, from the subject of the imposition of the property tax on the house at Bupyeong-si, which was later later later on February 6, 2018, imposed and collected the property tax on the said house on the Plaintiff at the latest, and thereafter, issued a comprehensive notice on the property tax on the house at issue (amended by Act No. 12844, Nov. 19, 2014).
() It appears that the tax authority provided the Plaintiff with the notice price exceeding KRW 600 million pursuant to Article 21. Around January 4, 2019, a disposition of imposition of KRW 102,00 of the comprehensive real estate holding tax for the year 2014 and KRW 20,400 of the special rural development tax for the Plaintiff (hereinafter “disposition of imposition on January 4, 2019”).
(2) Disposition of imposition of KRW 111,740 of comprehensive real estate holding tax for April 1, 2015, and KRW 22,940 of special rural development tax for rural development tax (hereinafter “instant disposition”) is the initial disposition of this case.
AB made it.
This seems to be in accordance with Article 17 (1) of the Comprehensive Real Estate Tax Act.
C. On June 3, 2019, the Plaintiff filed a petition for review with the Commissioner of the National Tax Service for the disposition of imposition as of January 4, 2019 and the initial disposition in the instant case, but the Commissioner of the National Tax Service dismissed the petition on September 4, 2019.
On the other hand, on August 2, 2019, the Defendant erred in the amount of property tax to be deducted from the amount of comprehensive real estate holding tax, and the comprehensive real estate holding tax for the year 2015 belongs to the Plaintiff.