1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation concerning this case is as follows between the last 5th and the first 6 first e.g., the reasoning for the judgment of the first instance.

2. The addition of the judgment in addition is identical to the reasons for the judgment in the first instance, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. 추가하는 부분 「 5) 추가 판단 ㈎ 요컨대, 소득세법상 양도소득세는 과세기간이 끝나는 때에 납세의무가 성립하므로 특별한 사정이 없는 한 과세기간이 끝나는 매년 12. 31. 당시 시행되는 법령이 적용되고(대법원 2013. 2. 15. 선고 2012두7400 판결 참조), 1세대 1주택의 양도로서 비과세 대상이 되는지 여부도 당해 주택의 양도시기와 그 시기가 속하는 과세기간에 시행되는 법령에 의하여 판단하여야 한다.

Therefore, whether the Plaintiff’s transfer of the instant house, which took place on February 4, 2009, is exempt from taxation as the transfer of one house by one household, is also subject to the amendment by Presidential Decree No. 20618, Feb. 22, 2008, which was amended by Presidential Decree No. 22034, Feb. 18, 2010, the main text of Article 154(1) and proviso No. 2 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act and the proviso thereof.

It must be determined by the item.

㈏ 그런데 위 시행령 제154조 제1항 본문은 양도일 현재 3년 보유요건과 2년 거주요건을 갖춘 거주자의 1세대 1주택 양도를 비과세 대상으로 규정하고 있는 것이어서, 양도일 현재 거주자가 아니었던 원고의 이 사건 주택 양도에 대하여는 적용될 여지가 없고, 그 단서 제2호 나.

The application of this item is only a problem, and the above provision, which was amended by Presidential Decree No. 19327 of Feb. 9, 2006, can only be a non-taxation object if it is transferred within two years from the date of departure, and the plaintiff who transferred the instant house to February 4, 2009 after departure from the Republic of Korea on December 9, 2001.