If the documents submitted for tax reduction and exemption are not recorded in the receipt ledger due to the fault of the tax authority, the propriety of the disadvantageous disposition against the taxpayer

Where a taxpayer submitted an application for capital gains tax reduction or exemption to the competent tax office along with a prescribed document to the relevant tax office, but the employee in charge is not registered on the receipt ledger and attached only to the back of the taxation data, the receipt of the relevant document, etc. and the registration on the receipt ledger shall belong to the tax authority’s obligations. As such, the tax authority cannot impose a disadvantage on the taxpayer on the premise that the taxpayer did not file an application for capital gains tax reduction or exemption on the ground that the relevant document was not received.

Enforcement Decree of the Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption Act (Presidential Decree No. 9232), Article 2-4(3)

Plaintiff

The director of Seoul District Tax Office

The disposition of imposition of capital gains tax of KRW 14,979,459 against the plaintiff on December 16, 1981 by the defendant and KRW 4,126,468 shall be revoked.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the defendant.

The same shall apply to the order.

If Gap evidence No. 1 (Tax Payment Notice), Gap evidence No. 2 (Determination Contents), Eul evidence No. 4, Eul evidence No. 1-1, evidence No. 1-2, evidence No. 1-3, evidence No. 1-4, Eul evidence No. 1-4, and Eul evidence No. 1-5 (sales Contract) are added to the whole purport of the pleadings, the plaintiff's tax reduction and exemption amount of 1-4, 200-7, 3-7, 9-1, 3-4, 9-1, 9-1, 3-4, 9-1, 9-1, 3-4, 97, 197, 4-1, 197, 4-1, 3-1, 4, 97, 3-1, 4, 197, and 9-1, 30-1, 97, 30-1, 4, 1979-1,

The Plaintiff is a land for collective housing construction, and the Plaintiff transferred the same to the operator of the above collective housing development project. As the Plaintiff is subject to reduction and exemption of capital gains tax pursuant to Article 3-3(5) of the Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption Act, the Plaintiff submitted an application for reduction and exemption of capital gains tax on January 6, 1979 to the competent tax office on behalf of the non-party 1 corporation. The employee of the tax office at the time set forth 3,750,894 and the defense tax amount of KRW 3,029,90 as stated in the above application for reduction and exemption of capital gains tax on behalf of the non-party 1 for the above construction project (the non-party 2) and the non-party 9's application for reduction and exemption of capital gains tax on behalf of the non-party 1 for the above new housing construction project, the Plaintiff is deemed to have not been subject to the above tax reduction and exemption under Article 3-3(5) of the Enforcement Decree of the Decree of the Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption Act.

The defendant asserted to the effect that although the non-party Korea-Japan submitted an application for income tax reduction within a lawful period of time, it cannot be deemed that there was a legitimate application since the applicant did not have any record on the receipt ledger of the district tax office at the time without being affixed the applicant on the application, but the receipt of the above documents submitted by the non-party Korea-Japan-Cos and recorded them in the receipt ledger shall be deemed to belong to the defendant's duty. Since the defendant failed to perform his duty, the above documents cannot be damaged because the plaintiff did not receive

According to the above facts, the plaintiff transferred the housing construction site to the executor of the relevant collective housing district development project, and the non-party Han New Public Corporation, the purchaser, applied for a legitimate reduction of capital gains tax as prescribed by the Presidential Decree. Therefore, the plaintiff shall be exempted from income tax on the income accrued from the transfer of the above land, and the defendant's conclusion different from this conclusion is unlawful, so it shall be revoked, and the litigation cost shall be borne by the defendant as the losing party.

Judges Yoon Young-young (Presiding Judge) Kim Ho-hoon