logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2016.02.18 2014두43639
양도소득세부과처분취소
Text

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).

1. As to the grounds of appeal Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 6, the lower court acknowledged facts as indicated in its reasoning by citing the grounds of the first instance judgment or by comprehensively taking account of the adopted evidence, and, in light of the circumstances as indicated in its reasoning, it is difficult to view the Plaintiff’s child D and F as an independent living fund by taking a separate account of the Plaintiff at the time of the transfer of the instant apartment, and on the grounds that the remainder of the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to recognize such fact, the lower court rejected the Plaintiff’

In light of the relevant legal principles and records, the above determination by the court below is just, and contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there were no errors in the misapprehension of the legal principles as to the requirements for non-taxation for one house per household, failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, or exceeding the bounds of

2. As to the ground of appeal No. 4, in calculating transfer margin by using the actual transaction value as the transfer value of assets, where the acquisition value, which is one of the necessary expenses deducted from the transfer value of assets, is calculated based on the transaction example, etc. at the time of acquisition of assets, the taxpayer may not, in principle, deduct the amount from the estimated expenses in addition to the estimated expenses deduction, even if the taxpayer actually disbursed the capital expenses, transfer expenses, etc. as prescribed in

(See Supreme Court Decision 2011Du24286 Decided October 15, 2015). citing the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, the lower court, citing the reasons indicated in its reasoning, as long as the Plaintiff cannot verify the actual transaction price at the time of the purchase of the instant apartment, and thus, should determine the acquisition price based on the conversion price.

arrow