양도소득세부과처분취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On June 30, 2003 and January 15, 2004, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer for 1/2 shares of the Seo-gu Daejeon District Court, Seo-gu, Daejeon (hereinafter “instant land”). On April 14, 2004, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer for the instant land to C.
B. On the instant land, the Plaintiff newly constructed a multi-family house with the 4th floor of steel reinforced concrete (refluor), a multi-family house with the 151.92 square meters, a multi-family house with the 2nd class neighborhood living facilities with the 2nd class neighborhood living facilities with the 151.92 square meters, a multi-family house with the 3rd floor (one household), a multi-family house with the 128.82 square meters, a multi-family house with the 4th floor (one household), a multi-family house with the 81.07 square meters (hereinafter “instant building”; and the instant land combined with the instant land, completed the registration of ownership preservation on December 20, 203, and completed the registration of ownership transfer to C on April 14, 2004.
C. On June 24, 2004, the Plaintiff: “The acquisition price of the instant land was KRW 226,213,750; KRW 156,76,712; KRW 382,980,462; KRW 400,000; KRW 1,275,131; and KRW 1,147,618; and KRW 382,980,462; and KRW 400,000; and KRW 1,275,131; and KRW 1,147,618,” respectively.
On September 7, 2012, the Defendant: (a) considered the transfer value of the instant real estate as KRW 590,00,000; (b) imposed capital gains tax on the Plaintiff for the imposition of KRW 96,147,618, penalty tax for failure to file a return; (c) KRW 9,378,236, additional tax for failure to file a return; and (d) KRW 75,582,00,006, total amount of KRW 181,107,860 (hereinafter “instant disposition”).
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 15 evidence (including branch numbers), Eul 1 to 4, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. (1) The Plaintiff’s assertion that the transfer value of the instant real estate was KRW 590,00,000 does not conflict. However, the Plaintiff under-reported the construction cost of the instant building in order to accord with the transfer value lower than KRW 400,000 as a practice of multilateral contract preparation, and the construction cost of the instant building.