logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2017. 04. 13. 선고 2017두30146 판결
(심리불속행) 토지분쟁수수료로 볼 수 없고 상환내역이 분명하여 증여가 아닌 차입거래에 해당함[일부국패]
Case Number of the immediately preceding lawsuit

Seoul High Court-2016-Nu-34389 ( December 07, 2016)

Title

(A) A loan transaction that does not constitute a fee for land dispute and does not constitute a loan transaction that is not a donation, with the details of redemption clear.

Summary

(C) It is reasonable to deem that the amount of remittance sent in the name of a person unrelated to the land cannot be deducted from the transfer tax with the fees related to the land, and since there is no evidence to prove that the loan is borrowed, it is clear that the loan is not a donation.

Related statutes

Article 97 of the Income Tax Act: Necessary expenses of transfer income and taxation of gift tax Article 2 of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act

Text

All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against Plaintiff Kim 00 and Defendant 00. The costs of appeal are assessed against Plaintiff Kim 00, while the costs of appeal between Plaintiff Shin 00 and Defendant 00 are assessed against the director of the tax office.

Reasons

The lower judgment was examined in light of the records of the instant case, but the allegation on the grounds of appeal falls under Article 4 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure for Appeal.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 5 of the above Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

arrow