logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2018.08.29 2018구단63108 (2)
양도소득세경정거부처분취소
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 April 16, 2007, the Plaintiff acquired the instant real estate (hereinafter collectively referred to as “instant real estate”) and its ground buildings (hereinafter collectively referred to as “instant real estate”), but transferred the instant real estate to Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government in KRW 1,200,000,000 on February 28, 2014, and reported and paid transfer income tax to the Defendant on April 28, 2014 on April 28, 2014.

B. However, on November 6, 2017, the Plaintiff filed a request for rectification of reduction of KRW 12,663,770, an amount equivalent to 15% of the tax payable, on the ground that the requirements for reduction or exemption under Article 77(1)1 of the former Restriction of Special Taxation Act (amended by Act No. 12570, May 14, 2014; hereinafter the same) was met at the time of transfer of the instant transfer to the Defendant.

C. However, on January 5, 2018, the Defendant issued a rejection disposition against the Plaintiff on the ground that the requirements for the said reduction or exemption were not satisfied.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”) D.

On January 17, 2018, the Plaintiff filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal, but the Tax Tribunal dismissed the appeal on May 10, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without any dispute, entry in Gap's evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 10, 12, 13, 14, 19, 20, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3 (including branch numbers if there are above numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. Article 4 subparag. 3 of the Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for the Plaintiff’s alleged public works projects (hereinafter “Public Works Act”) provides for “project for the operation of child-care centers” as one type of public works.

However, Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government acquired the real estate of this case as a childcare center.

Therefore, the transfer income of this case is generated by transferring the land, etc. necessary for the public works to which the Public Works Act applies, which stipulated the income subject to tax reduction or exemption as stipulated by Article 77 (1) 1 of the former Restriction of Special Taxation Act, to the executor

arrow