Seoul High Court 2011Nu34995 (Law No. 28, 2012.06)

National Tax Service Review and Transfer 2010-012 (2010.05)

It is difficult to recognize that the actual right of retention has been exercised on a successful building and the payment for waiver has been made.

(C) In light of the fact that the former owner of the building has paid the price for the waiver of the right of retention for the cost for the construction of the building at auction after the acquisition of the building, it is difficult to deem that there was an actual lien or an obligation to pay the cost for the construction of the building due to the fact that the former owner failed to present a quotation or a contract for the construction of the building and fails to report

2012Du1795 Revocation of Disposition of Imposing capital gains tax

XX

Director of the District Office

Seoul High Court Decision 2011Nu34995 Decided June 28, 2012

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

The judgment of the court below and the appellate brief all of the records of this case, but the appellant's ground of appeal is not included in the grounds provided by each subparagraph of Article 4 (1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure of Appeal or it is recognized that there is no reason. Thus, the appeal is dismissed under Article 5 of the same Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by

Reference materials.

If the grounds for final appeal are not included in the grounds of appeal that make it appropriate for the court of final appeal to become a legal trial, such as matters concerning significant violation of Acts and subordinate statutes, etc., the system of final appeal will not continue to proceed with the deliberation on the merits of the grounds for final appeal, but will not proceed with the deliberation on the merits of the grounds for final