logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2019.01.15 2018누67260
취득세등부과처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the court’s explanation concerning this case is as stated in the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the dismissal or addition of the text of the judgment of the court of first instance as follows. Thus, it shall be cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

In addition, the following is added to the second sentence of the first instance judgment, “Irre...,” and the charges for the school site of this case are imposed by the Defendant prior to the Plaintiff’s acquisition of the instant complex facilities. The charges for the school site of this case constitute an indirect cost to have been borne by the Plaintiff for the acquisition of the instant complex facilities before the Plaintiff acquired the instant complex facilities.

No. 6 of the first instance judgment No. 7, “No. 7,” added the following, and once once the Plaintiff imposed a school site charge on the construction of a new main complex facility of this case, it satisfies the requirements as an indirect cost to be borne by the Plaintiff in accordance with the relevant statutes in order to acquire the main complex facility of this case.

In other words, unlike farmland preservation charges or expenses incurred in creating forest replacement resources, even if the charges for school sites are imposed at the discretion of the imposing authority, so long as the obligation to bear arises due to a disposition of imposition, it shall not be deemed that the same does not apply.

Under the 6th sentence of the first instance judgment, D Co., Ltd. actually added the following in addition to the following (the increase in the above value does not affect the nature as an indirect cost for school site charges even after the acquisition of the Plaintiff’s main complex facility in this case) around September 201: (a) around September 201, 201, D Co., Ltd., in fact adding the following contents to the following below to the 7th sentence: (b) Seongdong-gu Seoul, Seongdong-gu, Seoul, F Co., Ltd. (a total floor area of 170,841.46m2).

arrow