beta
Title
(As in the judgment of the first instance court), it cannot be deemed that any deficit brought forward should be deducted at the time of calculating the capital gains tax base.
Summary
( accepted Judgment of the court of first instance) It cannot be deemed that any deficit brought forward should be deducted at the time of calculating the capital gains tax base.
Cases
2015Nu52472 Revocation of disposition of imposing capital gains tax
Plaintiff and appellant
A
Defendant, Appellant
Deputy Director of the Tax Office
Judgment of the first instance court
Incheon District Court Decision 2014Gudan10636 Decided June 30, 2015
Conclusion of Pleadings
Mar. 16, 2016
Imposition of Judgment
6 April 2016
1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;
The reasoning for the court’s explanation concerning this case is as follows. Thus, the reasoning for the court’s explanation is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for partial contents of the judgment of the court of first instance as follows. Thus, it is cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act
From the 5th bottom to the 13th 14th 14th m "unsatisfy".
It can not be readily determined (other than a corporation extinguished due to liquidation, there is a difference in the method of deduction of losses carried forward because an individual entrepreneur is not extinguished due to the closure of business, and even if the individual entrepreneur discontinues the real estate rental business without deduction of losses carried forward, if he/she continues to engage in the real estate rental business after the closure of the real estate rental business, he/she may be entitled to deduction of losses carried forward at all times. Therefore, in calculating liquidation income through the dissolution of a corporation, losses shall be offset within the scope of surplus (Article 79(4) of the Corporate Tax Act). Thus, inasmuch as losses carried forward cannot be offset all according to the scale of surplus, the depreciation costs included
2. Conclusion
Therefore, the judgment of the first instance court is justifiable, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit.