양도소득세부과처분취소등
1. The part of the instant lawsuit regarding the revocation claim against the imposition of local income tax shall be dismissed.
2. The plaintiff's remainder.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On February 24, 1992, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer based on the cancellation of the title trust on May 10, 1987 with respect to the land of Gangseo-gu Busan Metropolitan City, B river No. 378m2 and C river No. 1,936m2 (hereinafter “instant land”).
B. On December 14, 2012, the Plaintiff was admitted to the Korea Land and Housing Corporation in KRW 382,012,420, and on February 28, 2013, the Plaintiff made a preliminary return of capital gains tax on the following: (a) the transfer value of the above expropriation to the Defendant on February 28, 2013; (b) the sum of KRW 189,600,000 and KRW 150,000 borrowed from three other parties (hereinafter “the instant loan”); and (c) the acquisition value was KRW 339,60,000,000.
C. On May 6, 2014, the Defendant confirmed the field of capital gains tax for the Plaintiff, and then corrected and notified the amount of KRW 339,60,00 (including additional tax 232,080) and the amount of KRW 2,784,00 for local income tax to the Plaintiff on August 6, 2014, by deducting the loan from the acquisition value on the ground that the loan of this case was merely the construction cost and there is no evidence regarding the details of use. On August 6, 2014, the Defendant corrected and notified the amount of KRW 30,127,970 (including additional tax 6,214,753) and the amount of capital gains tax for rural development tax, KRW 1,722,640 (including additional tax 2
(E) The imposition of the above capital gains tax and special rural development tax by aggregating them (hereinafter “instant disposition”).
The plaintiff appealed and filed an appeal with the National Tax Service, but was dismissed on March 31, 2015.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry in Gap evidence 1, 6, 9 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The Defendant asserts that the part concerning the claim for revocation of imposition of local income tax among the instant lawsuit is unlawful, since the imposition of local income tax is under the jurisdiction of the head of the local government having jurisdiction over the place of tax payment.
The local income tax on capital gains of a resident shall be paid by return to the head of the competent Si/Gun/Gu.