beta
Text
1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;
2. The Defendant’s transfer income tax attributed to the Plaintiff on December 1, 2015 158,952.
Reasons
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On October 24, 1997, the Plaintiff acquired the remaining shares on September 21, 1998, and transferred the instant land to 664,00,000,000 won to 397/2311 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”).
B. The Plaintiff filed an application for reduction or exemption of capital gains tax under Article 69(1) of the former Restriction of Special Taxation Act (amended by Act No. 13560, Dec. 15, 2015; hereinafter the same) with the Defendant upon filing a preliminary return on the tax base of capital gains tax reverting to the year 2014 following the transfer of the instant land.
C. On September 2015, the Defendant rendered a judgment that “The Plaintiff did not own the instant land for at least eight years after the acquisition thereof,” and imposed KRW 158,952,360 on the Plaintiff on December 1, 2015, as a result of the on-site investigation of the capital gains tax on the Plaintiff.
(hereinafter “instant disposition”) D.
On February 23, 2016, the Plaintiff appealed to the Tax Tribunal, but the Tax Tribunal dismissed the request on May 9, 2016.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 15, 17, Eul evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The plaintiff's assertion is registered as a member of the Korea Agricultural Cooperative from August 1970 to DF, and is a farmer engaged in farming until now as a "after-generation farmer selected by Kim Jong-si in 1983."
From around 1997 to 2004, the Plaintiff cultivated rice on the instant land. From 2004, 1/3 of the instant land cultivated rice. From 2004, 2/3 converted into dry field, and 2/3 of the instant land produced spathy, spathy, winter, and so forth.
The Plaintiff constitutes an exemption from capital gains tax by directly cultivating the instant land for not less than eight years, and thus, the instant disposition by the Defendant on a different premise is unlawful.
(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes;
C. 1) Decision 1) Article 69(1) of the former Restriction of Special Taxation Act, the former Enforcement Decree of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 268