beta
Case Number of the immediately preceding lawsuit
Daejeon District Court 2010Guhap2410 ( November 24, 2010)
Case Number of the previous trial
Cho High Court Decision 2009Hu4252 (2010.03.09)
Title
Appropriateness of the assertion that the contract was rescinded and the transfer was not made.
Summary
In light of the fact that a sales contract was concluded to transfer all land (as in the judgment of the court of first instance) and the fact that the sales balance was fully received, the claimant's assertion that the sales contract was rescinded cannot be accepted.
Cases
2010Nu2744 Revocation of disposition of imposing capital gains tax
Plaintiff and appellant
Park AA
Defendant, Appellant
○ Head of tax office
Judgment of the first instance court
Daejeon District Court Decision 2010Guhap2410 Decided November 24, 2010
Conclusion of Pleadings
March 24, 2011
Imposition of Judgment
April 21, 201
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. Costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked. The defendant's imposition of capital gains tax of KRW 259,294,467 against the plaintiff on May 1, 2009 shall be revoked.
Reasons
The reasoning for the court's explanation concerning this case is as follows: "No. 9, 209.5.9" of No. 2, No. 2, No. 18, and No. 2009.9 of the first instance court's ruling shall be " May 1, 2009.1"; "No. 4, Dec. 30, 2005.30" of No. 1, "No. 2008.7, 2008.7" of No. 4, "No. 2008.7," "No. 7, 2008.7"; "No. 6, No. 8 between the plaintiff and the defendant" shall be "No. 150,00,000"; "No. 150,000" of No. 8, Dec. 12, 2009; "No. 1515,986, May 15, 2005"; "No. 25, etc.198.5"
Therefore, the judgment of the first instance court is justifiable, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.