beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On November 29, 2010, the Plaintiff: (a) purchased the ownership by winning the bid for KRW 562,311,100, totaling KRW 41,42, and 42-1 of the 17th main apartment building on the ground of B large 3165,65 square meters (hereinafter “B”) on the 17th main apartment building of Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant aggregate building”); (b)
B. Based on the officially assessed individual land price in 2016, the Defendant calculated the property tax base on the share of the site ownership in the instant aggregate building Nos. 41, 42, and 42-1 of the instant aggregate building based on the officially assessed individual land price in 2016, as KRW 801,691,310. The Defendant imposed and collected KRW 2,205,070 on the Plaintiff regarding the land of this case, KRW 1,122,360 on the instant land, and KRW 41,010 on the Plaintiff.
(hereinafter collectively referred to as "disposition of this case") / [Grounds for recognition] without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The Plaintiff’s right to use site is to own a section for exclusive use, and it cannot be transferred separately from that of a section for exclusive use. As such, the value of the right to use site does not simply vary depending on the area corresponding to the right to use site, but rather depending on the utility value
Therefore, in imposing property tax, the value of the right to use site of an aggregate building who is not a house should be calculated by dividing the whole value of the site of the aggregate building by the price of the section for exclusive use.
To do this, property tax, etc. shall be subject to cumulative taxation as in the case of housing with respect to a section for exclusive use and a right to use site of an aggregate building which is not a house, and the standard market price shall be assessed as one.
The current method such as the 1st floor is in violation of the principle of able to impose taxes according to the ability to bear the burden by receiving benefits from the 1st floor and the remaining floor is considered to be damaged.
b) the Commission;