beta
Case Number of the immediately preceding lawsuit
Suwon District Court-2015-Gu Group-31668 ( March 25, 2016)
Title
It cannot be deemed that the annexed company was used as a house, and as it was used together with the commercial building, it does not constitute one house for one household.
Summary
(1) Even if the official injury annexed building is marked as a house, whether the building is a residential or business use should be determined as a whole. Even if a room attached to a business building was used as a residential purpose, it is reasonable to view it as a business building if it is used as a residential purpose.
Related statutes
Article 89 of the Income Tax Act
Cases
2016Nu4072 Revocation of disposition of imposing capital gains tax
Plaintiff and appellant
United StatesA
Defendant, Appellant
BB Director of the Tax Office
Judgment of the first instance court
Suwon District Court Decision 2015Gudan31668 Decided March 25, 2016
Conclusion of Pleadings
September 28, 2016
Imposition of Judgment
October 12, 2016
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 judgment of the first instance shall be revoked. The imposition of capital gains tax of KRW 154,979,338 against the plaintiff on March 3, 2014 by the defendant shall be revoked.
Reasons
1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;
This judgment is based on the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for partial contents of the judgment of the court of first instance as follows. Therefore, it is cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
�� 2면 10행 "피고는" 다음에 "구 소득세법(2013. 1. 1. 법률 제11611호로 개정되기 전의 것) 제89조 제1항 제3호, 구 소득세법 시행령(2012. 8. 31. 대통령령 제24076호
In accordance with section 154(1) and (2) of the Act, the term "as before amendment shall be added."
�� 2면 [인정근거]란에 "갑 제1호증의1 내지 3, 을 제1호증의 각 기재"를 추가한다.
�� 3면 13행의 "건물이 소득세법 제89조 제1항 제3호, 같은 법 시행령 제154조 제1항에 정한"을 삭제하고, "건물이 소득세법령이 정한 바에 따라 1세대 1주택의 기준이
(1) in addition to the term “assumed”.
�� 5면 3행의 "보이고" 다음에 "부속사의 주출입구도 식당의 주출입구와 같아 이 사건 부속사는"을 추가한다.
2. Conclusion
The judgment of the first instance is justifiable. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.