beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On December 3, 2012, the Plaintiff registered a business under the Housing Construction and Sales Business Act jointly with B (50% of their respective shares in the Plaintiff and B).
The Plaintiff and B newly built an apartment house with 16 households in Busan City (hereinafter “instant housing”) and obtained approval for use on or around June 27, 2013, and sold it around that time.
Since then, the Plaintiff and B reported the closure of November 6, 2013.
Total amount of income of the plaintiff 2,579,00,000 won 221,794,000,000 won 110,897,00 won 13,292,786 won 5,68,602 won
B. On May 30, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a comprehensive income tax return for the year 2013, and filed a comprehensive tax return and payment by applying the simplified expense under Article 143(4)2(b) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 24356, Feb. 15, 2013; Presidential Decree No. 24356, Feb. 15, 2013; hereinafter “former Income Tax Act”) on the ground that the sales of the instant housing by-products, such as scrap metal, acquired during the construction of new construction in the immediately preceding year in which the sales revenue amount of the instant housing was generated, and by applying the special tax reduction and exemption for small and medium enterprises under Article 7(1) of the former Restriction of Special Taxation Act (amended by Act No. 12173, Jan. 1, 2014; hereinafter “former Restriction of Special Taxation Act”).
C. After conducting a personal integration investigation against the Plaintiff, the Seoul Regional Tax Office: (a) deemed that the business was commenced in 2013, rather than 2012 years from selling by-products; and (b) excluded the simple expense rate applied by the Plaintiff at the time of new construction sale of the instant housing in 2013; (c) notified the Defendant of the taxation data to the effect that the Plaintiff ought to deny the reduction of and exemption from the special tax on small and medium enterprises by deeming that the Plaintiff was not operating a construction business.