logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
arrow
(영문) 아파트 매매사례가액을 쟁점아파트의 시가로 보아 증여세를 과세한 처분의 당부(기각)
조세심판원 조세심판 | 2008-06-16 | 조심2008서1262 | 상증
[Case Number]

Seocho 208west 1262 (Law No. 16, 2008)

[Items]

Donations

[Types of Decision]

Dismissal

[Summary of Decision]

It is reasonable to regard the same or similar transaction value as the market price at the time of donation because the transaction example falls under Article 49 (5) of the Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act.

[Related Acts]

Article 60 of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act / Article 49 of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act

【Disposition】

I dismiss the appeal.

【Reasoning】

1. Summary of disposition;

A. On December 28, 2006, the claimant received a donation from the father's GoOOOOOOOOOO(49.94m2, hereinafter "conscept apartment") from the Seoul Special Metropolitan City OOOOOOOOOOOOO(49.94m2, hereinafter "conscept apartment"), and assessed the value of the property donated to the at issue apartment as 73,000,000 won as the standard market price, and reported and paid the gift tax of KRW 3,870,000 on March 21, 2007.

B. On January 11, 2008, the disposition agency assessed the value of donated property to 108,500,000 won in accordance with the example of business transactions in main apartment Nos. 101, 309, 101, and 309 (hereinafter “sale apartment”) in the same location as the issues apartment, location, use and size of the apartment, and determined and notified the applicant of the gift tax of 3,856,720 won on December 28, 2006.

C. The claimant appealed and filed an appeal on April 7, 2008.

2. Opinions of the claimant and disposition agency;

A. The claimant's assertion

101. 309, which the disposition agency applied as a sales apartment as a sales example apartment, is formed at a higher price due to the difference between the issue apartment and the Dong and the floor, and it is unreasonable to impose gift tax by considering the transaction value of the sales case apartment as the market price of the related apartment even though there is a low transaction example among neighboring apartment houses.

(b) Opinions of disposition agencies;

The sales apartment has been transferred from December 28, 2006 to 108,500,000 won, which is within 3 months from the date of donation, because the related apartment and complex, the area of the apartment and complex are identical, and the standard market price of the apartment and the transfer of the gift tax is justifiable because the relevant property and the location, use and item of the area are identical or similar to those of the relevant apartment under Article 49(5) of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act.

3. Hearing and determination

(a) Points in dispute;

The propriety of the disposition imposing gift tax by deeming the transaction example of other apartment located in the same complex as the key apartment at the market price of the key apartment

B. Relevant statutes

(1) Article 60 of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act: (1) The value of the property on which the inheritance tax or gift tax is imposed under this Act shall be the market price as of the date of commencing the inheritance or the date of donation (hereinafter “date of appraisal”). In this case, the value assessed under the method of evaluation stipulated in Article 63 (1) 1 (a) and (b)

(2) The market price referred to in paragraph (1) shall be the value which is generally accepted in cases of free trade between many and unspecified persons, and include the public auction price and appraisal price which is recognized as the market price under conditions prescribed by Presidential Decree.

(3) In applying paragraph (1), where it is difficult to compute the market price, the value assessed by the methods prescribed in Articles 61 through 65 in consideration of the type, size, transaction status, etc. of the relevant property.

(2)Article 49 of the Inheritance and Gift Tax Act: (1) "The public auction price, appraisal price, etc., which is recognized as the market price under the conditions as prescribed by the Presidential Decree" in Article 60 (2) of the Inheritance and Gift Tax Act refers to the value confirmed by one of the following provisions if there is an auction for sale or expropriation (referring to an auction under the Civil Execution Act; hereafter the same shall apply in this paragraph) or public auction (hereafter referred to as "sale, etc." in this paragraph) for a period not exceeding six months before or after the evaluation base date (three months in the case of donated property; hereafter referred to as "evaluation period" in this paragraph):

1. The transaction value, if any, of the relevant property: Provided, That the transaction value is deemed objectively unfair, such as the transaction value with a person with a special relationship provided for in Article 26 (4), shall be excluded;

(2) In applying the provisions of paragraph (1), whether a value under any subparagraph of paragraph (1) falls within six months (three months for donated property) before or after the evaluation base date, shall be determined on the basis of the dates prescribed in the following subparagraphs, and in cases of two differentOs, the value which is deemed the market price under the provisions of paragraph (1) shall be determined on the date which is the nearest day before or

1. The sales contract date for the case of paragraph (1) 1;

(5) In applying the provisions of paragraph (1), where there are values of the relevant property and its location, use and items of the same or similar property falling under any subparagraph of the same paragraph, such values shall be deemed the market value under Article 60 (2) of the Act.

C. Facts and determination

(1) According to the relevant data of the agency, on December 28, 2006, the claimant received the issue apartment from his father OO, and evaluated and reported the value of donated property as the standard market price of 73,000,000 won. The issue apartment is the size of 49.94 square meters located on the second floor as 1013 Dong 209, and the standard market price as of the donation date is 73,000 won. The agency issued a notice of the gift tax to the claimant regarding the difference between the reported amount and the difference between the reported amount and the amount.

(2)The record of the investigation by the disposal authority reveals that the sales apartment is 309 square meters located on 101 3rd floor, adjacent to the disputed apartment, and 49.94 square meters, which are linked to the disputed apartment, and the standard market price is 73,00,000 won, which is the same as the standard market price of the disputed apartment, and is traded on 108,500,000 won, which is within 3 months prior to the donation.

In addition, when examining the example of business transactions presented by the claimant, the standard market price is higher than the standard market price of the at issue apartment, and it is difficult to compare it with the at issue apartment because the 101.6.26.25.206.1015.608.25.208 of the 2006.12.207.201.9.13.201. 101.201. 201. 201. the standard market price is the same, but the transaction price is lower than three months from the date of donation, and it is difficult to apply it as the example of business transactions.

(3) According to Article 49(5) of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act, where there is a transaction example of the same or similar property that is identical or similar to the relevant property, the transaction example shall be deemed to be the market price. Therefore, if there is such transaction example, it shall be applied first to the standard market price, which is the supplementary

(4) It is reasonable to regard the transaction value as the market price at the time of donation of the apartment at issue because the apartment is located in the Dong that is directly connected to the apartment at issue, the same direction and similar number of floors, and the location, use and items of the area are identical or similar as the standard market price as the same standard market price.

Therefore, it is judged that the claimant did not err in imposing gift tax.

4. Conclusion

This case's request for a trial has no merit as a result of the review, and it shall be decided as ordered under Articles 81 and 65(1)2 of the Framework Act on National Taxes.

arrow