Seoul High Court 2017Nu81023 (Law No. 25, 2018)

Since the defect can not be deemed to be obvious in appearance, it does not constitute an invalidation.

Since the real estate was transferred in the name of the plaintiff for more than two years, and the transfer income tax report under the name of the plaintiff was received, it appears that there was a factual basis to mislead the plaintiff as a taxpayer, and even if there is a separate transfer income earner, it cannot be deemed that the defect is apparent in appearance, and thus, it cannot

2018Du56145 Revocation of Disposition of Levying Transfer Income Tax

Park ○

○ Head of tax office

Seoul High Court Decision 2017Nu81023 Decided July 25, 2018

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

The records of this case and the judgment of the court below and the grounds of appeal were examined. However, the grounds of appeal on the grounds of appeal are not included in the grounds stipulated in each subparagraph of Article 4(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure for Appeal, and the appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 5 of the same Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by