취득세 부과처분 취소청구 등
1. As to the plaintiff:
(a) Attached list (the head of Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government) prepared by the head of Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. The Plaintiff is a corporation that runs a credit specialized business, siren business, etc. as its intended business. From January 17, 2009 to January 8, 2012, the location of its principal office was “Seoul Gangnam-gu, Seoul, 825-2,” and was changed to “235 (Distribution Do) according to the distribution of Seocho-gu, Seoul.”
B. From 207 to January 6, 2012, the Plaintiff: (a) registered 2,834 vehicles for facility leasing, which were acquired from 203 to 2034, as the Plaintiff’s place of business, to the place of use of “Seowon-si A and the 213 Simsan-ri, Sinwon-gun, Gyeongnam-gun, the location of the Plaintiff’s main office; (b) 445 vehicles for facility leasing acquired from January 17, 2012 (hereinafter “instant 2,834 vehicles and 445 vehicles for facility leasing”), as the Plaintiff’s place of use of the said box; and (c) reported and paid each acquisition tax on the key vehicle in Haan-gun, the local government having jurisdiction over the said place of use, and Changwon-gun-gun, and Changwon-gun, the respective acquisition tax on the key vehicle for facility leasing.
The details of acquisition tax paid by the Plaintiff at the Haan-Gun and Changwon-gun concerning the automobile for facility leasing acquired after January 1, 201 among the key lease vehicles (hereinafter referred to as the "lease of this case"), are as shown in the details of payment of acquisition tax.
C. On September 10, 2012, the head of Seocho-gu, and on September 30, 2012, the head of Seocho-gu, the head of the Defendant: (a) imposed each acquisition tax and additional tax on the key leased vehicle on the ground that “the head of Seocho-gu, the branch office and the branch office of the Plaintiff are false places of business without any physical or material elements; and (b) the place to pay acquisition tax on the key leased vehicle is Seoul Special Metropolitan City where the Plaintiff’s head office is located; (c) the Plaintiff is obliged to pay acquisition tax on the key leased vehicle to Seoul Special Metropolitan City.”
On the other hand, around September 27, 2012, the Plaintiff filed a request for correction to the effect that acquisition tax already paid to Defendant Haan-gun and Changwon-si market should be refunded.