logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 1984. 7. 24. 선고 82누520 판결
[지방세부과처분취소][집32(3)특,512;공1984.10.1.(737),1485]
Main Issues

(a) Where land for business purposes of a corporation falls under whether such land is vacant (affirmative);

B. The meaning of provisional buildings, unauthorized buildings, and temporary use under Article 142(1)(6) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act (Presidential Decree No. 9702, Dec. 31, 1979)

Summary of Judgment

A. The purpose of public land is to facilitate the efficient utilization of national land by imposing heavy taxes on land of a specific area and land category which is not used efficiently without distinguishing whether the owner is a natural person or a juristic person. The purpose is to restrain the investment of a juristic person more than the necessity of a juristic person and to promote the sound operation of a juristic person by imposing heavy taxes on all land that is not used directly for a juristic person’s own business without any restriction on a specific area and land category. Since a juristic person’s land for non-business use is a separate system, each separate system is a corporation’s land for business use, even if it is a corporation’s land for business use, it shall be subject to heavy taxation.

B. Among the official provisions of Article 142 (1) 1 (6) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 9702 of Dec. 31, 1979), the concept of temporary or unauthorized buildings should be determined on the basis of whether they are qualified as ground fixtures, and the term "provisional buildings" means temporary structures which are not equipped with the structure, form, and purpose as regular buildings and which can be dismantled easily. Unauthorized buildings lack construction permission only in the construction administration, and their structure, form, purpose, and solidness are limited to structures that meet the conditions of a building. The term "temporary use" in item (6) of the same Article means that it should be determined on the basis of whether they are utilized in proportion to their utility values. Thus, the term "temporary use" in item (6) of the same Article means that the location conditions of the land in question, the current status of the use of surrounding land, the existence of surrounding land, the type, lease period in the case of leased land, etc.

[Reference Provisions]

(a) Article 188 (1) 1 and 3 of the Local Tax Act, Article 142 (1) 1 and 6 of the Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act, Article 142 (1) 1 and 6 (b) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act (Presidential Decree No. 9702, Dec. 31, 1979); Article 142 (1) 1 and 6 (b) of the Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act (Presidential Decree No. 9702, Dec. 31, 1972); Article 142 (1) 6 of the Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act

Plaintiff-Appellant

[Defendant-Appellant] Han Jin-jin, Shin-ju, and Kim Young-young, Counsel for defendant-appellant-appellant-appellant

Defendant-Appellee

Attorney Han-dae, Counsel for the defendant-appellant of Busan Special Metropolitan City

Judgment of the lower court

Daegu High Court Decision 82Gu67 delivered on November 2, 1982

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal by the Plaintiff’s attorney are examined.

1. We examine the first ground for appeal.

For the efficient use of national land and the suppression of real estate speculation, Article 188 (1) 1 (3) of the Local Tax Act stipulates that property tax shall be determined by applying the same high-level rate to land for non-business use of the corporation.

However, according to Article 142 (1) 1 Item 6 of the Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act prior to the amendment, the term "public land" means land excluding the following from among land which has no ground settlement and is actually not used. In this case, the temporary land which was constructed after January 14, 1974 shall not be regarded as the ground settlement, and the temporary installation of goods and other temporary use of land shall not be considered the actual use of the land which is to be excluded from the public land. According to Article 142 (1) 7 of the Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act, "land for non-business use of a corporation" means land which is within the area as determined by the Ordinance of the Ministry of Home Affairs. It means land for non-business use of a corporation's own purpose (excluding dry field, stone collection place, and borrow place) as of the date of commencement of the property tax for non-business use, and the land which is not directly used for non-business use of a corporation shall be excluded from the land for non-business use without any justifiable reason.

In the end, the theory that the heavy taxation on public land is limited to the land owned by natural persons, and that the land owned by juristic persons shall not be subject to heavy taxation unless it is non-business for non-business purposes, or it shall not be employed as an independent opinion. There is no argument.

2. We examine the second ground for appeal.

Since the concept of a temporary building or an unauthorized building should be determined on the basis of whether it is qualified as a ground fixtures, it means a temporary structure that does not meet the structure, form, and use as a regular building, and the structure, form, and solidity of the building can be easily dismantled, and the above temporary use of the building should be determined on the basis of the conditions of the building. The above "temporary use" should be determined on the basis of the location of the land, the current status of the use of surrounding land, the existence of fixtures, and the rent rent for the leased land, and it is reasonable for the lower court to view that the above temporary use of the building was not appropriate for the use of the building as a temporary site for the first time after the 196th anniversary of the above determination of the lower court, based on the facts and circumstances of the building's use of the building, and there are no reasonable grounds for the lower court to recognize the temporary use of the building as a temporary site for the first time after the 196th anniversary of the rent for the building.

This paper also is without merit.

3. Therefore, the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed, and the costs of the appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Kang Young-young (Presiding Justice)

arrow