Suwon District Court 201Mo2393 ( October 18, 2011)

early 2010 Heavy3091 ( November 22, 2010)

In case of reporting capital gains tax by attaching false contracts, the exclusion period for imposition of 10 years is applied.

In case of falsely reporting the actual transaction price by attaching a false sales contract, a disposition imposing capital gains tax within a period of 10 years is legitimate because it constitutes a case of evading national taxes by fraud or other improper means, and thus the exclusion period of 10 years is applied.

The exclusion period of national tax imposition under Article 26-2 of the Framework Act on National Taxes

2011Nu3118 Revocation of Disposition of Imposing capital gains tax, etc.

Sector XX

Head of Pyeongtaek Tax Office

Suwon District Court Decision 201Guhap2393 Decided August 18, 2011

December 14, 2011

February 15, 2012

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked. The Defendant’s imposition of capital gains tax of KRW 71,767,860 against the Plaintiff on July 1, 2010 shall be revoked.

1. cite the judgment of the first instance;

The reasons for the judgment of this court are as follows: (a) the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance are the same as the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the Plaintiff’s new assertion and addition of the determination thereof; and (b) accordingly, (c) pursuant

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment as to the assertion

The plaintiff asserts that the disposition of this case was unlawful since the exclusion period has elapsed.

Article 26-2(1)1 of the former Framework Act on National Taxes (amended by Act No. 11124, Dec. 31, 2011; hereinafter the same) provides that where a taxpayer evades a national tax, or obtains a refund or deduction by fraudulent or other unlawful means, a national tax may not be imposed after the expiration of the ten-year period from the date on which the national tax is assessable. As seen earlier, the Plaintiff reported that the actual transaction price of the instant real estate was KRW 400,000,000, by attaching a false sales contract (Evidence 1-2) to the Plaintiff even though the actual transaction price was 535,000,000.

Since the above act committed by the Plaintiff constitutes a case where the Plaintiff evaded national taxes by fraud or other unlawful means, the exclusion period of 10 years is applied pursuant to Article 26-2(1)1 of the former Framework Act on National Taxes. The instant disposition was conducted within the ten-year exclusion period from the date on which capital gains tax may be imposed as a disposition imposing capital gains tax for the year 2003.

The plaintiff's assertion is without merit.

3. Conclusion

The judgment of the first instance is justifiable. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.