logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2010. 06. 30. 선고 2009누33883 판결
농지 대토에 따른 양도소득세 감면[국승]
Case Number of the immediately preceding lawsuit

Incheon District Court 2009Gudan1324 ( October 15, 2009)

Case Number of the previous trial

early 208 Heavy2769 (2009.04.07)

Title

Capital gains tax reduction or exemption for farmland substitute land;

Summary

With respect to the reduction or exemption of capital gains tax on substitute land for farmland, the fact that he/she has resided in substitute farmland within one year from the date of transfer of the previous land shall not be recognized.

The decision

The contents of the decision shall be the same as attached.

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The decision of the first instance court is revoked. The defendant's rejection disposition against the plaintiff on May 1, 2008 is revoked (the purport of the complaint is stated to seek revocation of the disposition of imposition of capital gains tax, but it is clear that the plaintiff seeks revocation of the disposition of rejection of application of capital gains tax correction).

Reasons

1. Quotation of judgments of the first instance;

The court's reasoning for this case is that the "Special Tax Treatment Control Act of the first instance court No. 11" is "former Restriction of Special Taxation Act (amended by Act No. 9131 of Sep. 26, 2008), "Enforcement Decree of the same Act" is "former Enforcement Decree of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 21064 of Oct. 7, 2008), "No. 10 of the fourth 4th 10" is "No. 2006. 27, Dec. 27, 2006", "No. 17" merely because the plaintiff alleged that the plaintiff had raised farmland at the location of each of the previous cases, "No. 208 for shipping the farmland to another or for expiration of the winter 10th 3th 1st 3th 1st 3th 1st 3th 1st 3th 3th 1st 1st 2012.

2.In conclusion

Therefore, the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow