Seoul Administrative Court 2006Gudan12596 (Law No. 21, 2008)

National High Court Decision 2006Du2764 ( October 12, 2006)

Whether the standard market price can be applied in cases of designation as a designated area between the date of a sales contract and the date of the remainder payment

It is difficult to view that the provisions of the Income Tax Act, etc. are against the principle of trust protection and the principle of prohibition of retroactive taxation, because they were designated as a designated area at any time according to the changes in the economic situation under the relevant provisions, and they were found to have known of such facts.

The contents of the decision shall be the same as attached.

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 refusal to request the correction of capital gains tax against the plaintiff on July 7, 2006 shall be revoked.

The court's explanation on the instant case is identical to the part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, citing it in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.