The case holding that the sale of a corporation for the proper purpose of its own use for not less than 1 year after the acquisition of land does not constitute a “case where a corporation becomes a non-business land of the corporation” under Article 112-3 of the former Local Tax Act (amended by Act No. 4415 of Dec. 14, 191).

The case holding that a corporation's direct use of land for its proper purpose for not less than one year after its acquisition and sale to another for unavoidable reasons such as business depression does not constitute "the case where a corporation becomes a non-business land of the corporation" under Article 112-3 of the former Local Tax Act (amended by Act No. 4415 of Dec. 14, 191).

Article 112-3 of the former Local Tax Act (amended by Act No. 4415 of Dec. 14, 1991)

[Plaintiff-Appellant] Plaintiff 1 and 1646 delivered on August 1, 1992 (Gong1992, 2785) 92Nu16072 delivered on February 12, 1993 (Gong1993, 1025) 92Nu1664 delivered on February 23, 1993 (Gong193, 1102)

Attorney Kim Jae-in et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellee-appellant

Gun:

Seoul High Court Decision 91Gu15616 delivered on October 6, 1992

The judgment below is reversed and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below affirmed the judgment below, on June 28, 1990, that the plaintiff is a corporation that conducts general gas business, petroleum retail business, etc. as its business, and the land of this case, which was used as the site of gas station at the time of June 22, 1989, and its ground oil station facilities such as oil station building, etc., which acquired a facility of gas station, and sold the land to the non-party Heavy Petroleum Co., Ltd. on June 28, 1990, because it was no longer accumulated as a result of business failure, since it was no longer possible for the plaintiff to continue its business due to the business failure. The case where non-business property of the corporation becomes non-business property of the corporation under Article 112-3 of the Local Tax Act (amended by Act No. 4415 of Dec. 14, 1991) includes the case where the land was sold within five years after its acquisition, and thus, the plaintiff did not use the land for business purpose.

However, the purpose of Article 112-3 of the same Act is to prevent unproductive speculation caused by the acquisition and holding of land other than the corporation's own purpose and to seek efficient utilization of land is to prescribe the heavy taxation of acquisition tax where the land becomes a non-business land of the corporation within 5 years after the corporation acquired the land in this case. Therefore, it is not necessary to regulate the sale of the land acquired by the corporation for any inevitable reason, such as aggravation of financial standing and business depression, etc. of the corporation directly using the land for its own purpose. As determined by the court below, since the plaintiff acquired the land in this case and directly used the land for its own purpose for 1 year or more, it is sold to another reason such as the deficit caused by the business depression, etc., in light of its sale circumstances, it does not constitute "a case where a non-business land becomes a non-business land of a corporation" as provided in Article 112-3 of the same Act.

The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to non-business land of a juristic person under Article 112-3 of the same Act in determining that the land of this case constitutes a non-business land of a juristic person within 5 years from the acquisition of the land, and the arguments pointing this out are with merit.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed and the case is remanded to the court below. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Song Man-man (Presiding Justice)