Where the standard market price of real estate is determined to be higher than the actual market price, the effect of imposition of the tax on suppression of the investment of real estate imposed on the basis thereof.

According to Article 9 of the Real Estate Investment Control Act, Article 22 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, Article 29 of the Registration Tax Act, and Article 12 of the Enforcement Decree of the Registration Tax Act enforced at the time of this case, the standard market price of real estate, which is the basis for calculating the tax base of the real estate investment restriction tax, shall be determined and announced by the Commissioner of the National Tax Service on January 1 and July 1 of each year after consultation with the Minister of National Court Administration and the Minister of Home Affairs. As such, the standard market price determined and announced by the same method shall be presumed to be legitimate. Therefore, even if the standard market price of domestic affairs is determined at a higher level than the actual market price, deeming it as the object of cancelling the taxation imposed on the basis of the above standard market price as a separate issue, and there is a significant and apparent defect, and thus, it cannot be recognized that the invalidation is inevitable.

Article 9 of the Act on Special Measures for the Suppression of Real Estate Investment, Article 22 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on Special Measures for the Suppression of Real Estate Investment

Supreme Court Decision 72Nu96 delivered on May 23, 1972

Plaintiff 1 and 12 others

Head of Eastern Tax Office

The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff, etc.

(1) Disposition of imposition of KRW 298,856 on December 28, 1970 on Plaintiffs 1, 2, 3, and 4 of the same year as of December 28, 1970 on the 2nd three parts of the 226 forest area in the Seocho-gu Busan Metropolitan City, Busan Metropolitan City.

(2)the imposition of the plaintiff 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 on the plaintiff 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 on an occasional amount of KRW 352,96 on the 2nd 7th mal of the 197 Yo-dong, Busan Metropolitan City.

(3) The Plaintiff 7, 9, 11, 12, and 13 confirmed that the disposition of imposition of KRW 80,561 on an occasional amount of KRW 20,000,000,000 from 1970,000,000,000,000,000,000,00,000,00,00

Judgment that the lawsuit costs shall be borne by the defendant

The Defendant’s taxation disposition stated in the purport of the claim was without dispute between the parties, and the gist of the Defendant’s assertion by the Plaintiff et al.

(1) On December 26, 1949, the Plaintiff et al. purchased the forest land described therein and sold it at 60 won per square year to the Non-party Dong International Institute of Diplomatic, Inc. on May 26, 1970.

(2) On April 23, 1970, the Plaintiff, etc. purchased the forest land stated therein in around 1915 and sold it to the Nonparty at KRW 100 per square meter.

(3) The plaintiff et al. purchased the forest land indicated in its statement in around 1915 and sold it to the non-party on March 23, 1970. In imposing real estate speculation suppressions, the plaintiff et al. considered the time when the plaintiff et al. acquired the forest land as of January 1, 1968 under paragraph (2) of the Addenda of the Act on Special Measures for the Suppression of Real Estate Speculation (hereinafter referred to as the "Real Estate Speculative Punishment"), and the time when the plaintiff et al. acquired the forest land as of January 1, 1968, and the disposal of the plaintiff et al. as of May 26, 1970; the time when the market price was transferred; the price was calculated and imposed as of April 23, 1970 and March 23, 1970, based on the above 200 won, which was the standard market price as of March 1, 1968.

However, according to Article 9 of the Real Estate Investment Control Act, Article 22 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, Article 29 of the Registration Tax Act, and Article 12 of the Enforcement Decree of the Registration Tax Act enforced at the time of this case, the standard market price of real estate, which is the basis for calculating the tax base of the real estate investment restraint tax, shall be determined and announced by the Commissioner of the National Tax Service on January 1 and July 1 of each year after consultation with the Minister of National Court Administration and the Minister of Home Affairs. As such, the standard market price determined and announced by the same method shall be presumed to be legitimate. Thus, even if the above standard market price is set higher than the actual market price, as alleged by the plaintiff, etc., even if the above standard market price was set higher than the actual market price, deeming it as the object of revoking the taxation disposition, which was calculated and imposed on the basis of the above standard market price as a separate issue, and it cannot be recognized

Therefore, the plaintiff et al.'s claim is dismissed, and the costs of lawsuit are assessed against the losing party and it is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Lee Jae-ho (Presiding Judge)