beta
(영문) 서울고등법원 2015. 06. 03. 선고 2014누64676 판결

건물소유자인 원고들만 임대차계약을 했으므로 제3자가 지급한 임대료는 전체 환산한 후 토지, 건물로 안분계산 하여야 함[국승]

Case Number of the immediately preceding lawsuit

Seoul Administrative Court 2014Guhap50798 (Law No. 18, 2014)

Title

Since only the plaintiffs who are the building owners have concluded a lease contract, the rent paid by a third party shall be calculated in accordance with the calculation of the rent with the land and the building after the conversion.

Summary

(F) The rent paid by a third party shall be deemed to be the entire land and the entire building, and the rent paid by the third party shall be calculated in accordance with the standard market price (land and building) after converting it into the whole.

Related statutes

Article 50 of the Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act

Cases

2014Nu64676 Revocation of Disposition of Imposition of Gift Tax

Plaintiff

1. KimA 2. KimB

Defendant

O Head of tax office

Conclusion of Pleadings

May 20, 2015

Imposition of Judgment

June 3, 2015

Text

1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

Purport of claim and appeal

The judgment of the first instance court shall be revoked. The disposition of imposition of gift tax by the director of the tax office on June 1, 2012 against the plaintiff KimA (including additional tax) and the disposition of imposition of gift tax by the director of the tax office on February 7, 2013 against the plaintiff KimB shall be revoked on February 7, 2013.

Reasons

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasoning of this court's judgment is as follows, except for the dismissal of the following matters among the judgments of the court of first instance, and thus, it is accepted in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

○ 4. 2. The phrase "Ordinance of the Ministry of Strategy and Finance" shall be read as "Ordinance of the Ministry of Strategy and Finance", the phrase " May 30, 2012" as " June 1, 2012", and the phrase " May 30, 2012" as " February 7, 2013" respectively.

2. Conclusion

The judgment of the first instance is justifiable. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.