The propriety of the disposition of calculating the value of donated property in consideration of transaction example of neighboring apartment

Even if there is a somewhat different difference between the area of parking space and the distance between elementary school, market, and Dong office, the 7-dong in which the comparative apartment is located and the 5-dong in which the apartment of this case is located, such difference is not likely to affect the formation of the transaction value of the apartment.

Article 60 (General Principles, etc. of Appraisal)

Article 49 (Principles, etc. of Appraisal)

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The imposition of gift tax of KRW 119,462,70 against the Plaintiff on July 4, 2007 shall be revoked.

1. Circumstances of dispositions;

A. On December 15, 2005, the Plaintiff donated ○○○○-dong 758-4 00 5 1101 (hereinafter “instant apartment”), and completed the registration of ownership transfer on the 20th of the same month.

B. On March 17, 2006, the Plaintiff reported and paid KRW 70,740,000,000, which is calculated by calculating the value of donated property of the apartment of this case, as the standard market value, to the Defendant, KRW 402,00,00,00, which is the value of donated property of this case, as the taxable value of donated property.

C. As of December 20, 2005 as of the donation date of the apartment of this case, the Defendant confirmed that the purchase and sale case of neighboring apartment of this case was conducted in KRW 7,501, 70,000, which is an apartment of the same area located in the same complex as the apartment of this case (hereinafter referred to as "the comparison apartment of this case"), and thus, pursuant to Article 60(1) and (2) of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act and Article 49(1) and (5) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, the Defendant calculated KRW 770,00,000 as the sale price of the comparative apartment of this case by considering it as the market price of the apartment of this case and calculated it as the value of the property of the apartment of this case, and imposed the disposition of this case on July 4, 2007 as gift tax of KRW 119,462,700 (including additional payment for wrong payment) as gift tax due to the donation of this case.

D. On September 19, 2007, the Plaintiff filed an appeal with the National Tax Tribunal. On December 26, 2007, the National Tax Tribunal rendered a decision to dismiss the Plaintiff’s appeal.

[Ground of recognition] The written evidence Nos. 1, 2, 8, and No. 2-1, 2, 3, 4, and 7 of the evidence No. 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The comparison apartment of this case is located in 7 units, and the parking space secured by each unit is larger than that of this case, and the distance between elementary schools, Schlages and Dong offices is higher than that of this case. The comparison apartment of this case is located in 5 floors, and the apartment of this case is different from that of the apartment of this case in 11 floors. The comparison apartment of this case is located in 30 years, and it is likely that the inside repair condition of the apartment of this case is different compared to the apartment of this case. The standard market price of the comparison apartment of this case is 580,00,000 won and the standard market price of the comparison apartment of this case is much higher than 402,00,000 won at the time of the donation of the apartment of this case, it is difficult to view that the apartment of this case is identical or similar to the market price of the apartment of this case.

(b) Related statutes;

Article 60 (General Principles, etc. of Appraisal)

Article 49 (Principles, etc. of Appraisal)

C. Determination

(1) Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings in the evidence Nos. 4,5,6,7,8,10,11 of this case, the comparative apartment was sold in KRW 70,000,00 as an apartment building in the same complex as the apartment of this case (the seven buildings where the comparative apartment of this case is located and the five buildings where the apartment of this case is located are located are located, and the maximum number of floors of each apartment of this case is all 12 floors), and it can be recognized that the size, location, date of sale, transaction amount, and standard market price of the comparative apartment of this case and the comparative apartment of this case are as shown below.

Classification

Dong

Number of houses

Area

Observation

The date of donation/trade

Amount of transaction ( won)

Standard Market Price (won) (Standards of May 2, 2005)

This case

Apartment house

5 Dong

1101

131.41

South:

December 20, 2005

402,000,000

This case

Comparison Apartment

7 Dong

501

131.41

South:

9, 2006

700,000,000

395,000,000

(2) As seen above, the comparison apartment of this case differs from the apartment of this case, but its location is similar to that of the same apartment of this case, and the area, purpose and category are identical, and the standard market price of the comparison apartment of this case at the time of the donation of this case is below 402,00,000 won as the standard market price of the apartment of this case at the time of the donation of this case at 395,000,000, which is less than 402,000 won. The standard market price of the apartment of this case at the time of the donation of this case at 50,000,000 won, which is the same as that of the apartment of this case at 395,00,000 won as that of the apartment of this case, and the apartment of this case at the time of the donation of this case at 50,000,000 won, which are identical to that of the apartment of this case at 70,000,0000 won.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.