Seoul Administrative Court-2012-Gu Group-26282 ( August 23, 2013)

This disposition imposed according to the audit and cadastral register of the National Tax Service after the initial disposition was cancelled as a result of the processing of civil petitions does not go against the principle of protecting the trust of taxpayers.

Considering the purpose and contents of the processing system of civil petitions for grievances and the fact that the disposition of this case is based on Article 80 (4) of the Income Tax Act, it cannot be deemed contrary to the principle of trust and good faith, and the principle of trust and protection, and it is impossible to expect the Plaintiff to pay the transfer income tax until the disposition of this case

Article 80 (Determination and Correction)

Seoul High Court 2013Nu27342

AA

J Head of J Tax Office

Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2012Gudan26282 decided October 23, 2013

March 26, 2014

April 9, 2014

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

1. Purport of claim

The Defendant’s imposition of KRW 00,00,000 (including additional taxes) for the transfer income tax of 2008 on July 1, 2011 against the Plaintiff shall be revoked.

2 Purport of appeal

The part of the judgment of the first instance against the plaintiff shall be revoked. The defendant against the plaintiff on July 1, 2011 is limited to that against the plaintiff.

The imposition of capital gains tax of KRW 000,000,000 (including additional tax) for the year 2008 shall be revoked.

Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act, civil law, since the reasoning of this court's judgment is identical to that of the first instance court.

It is quoted in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Litigation Act.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified within the above scope of recognition, and the remaining claims are dismissed as there is no ground. Since the judgment of the court of first instance is just in this conclusion, the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed, and the defendant SS director was corrected from the court of first instance to the defendant J chief of the court of first instance due to the change of authority, and this part of the judgment of the court of first instance is modified. It is so decided as per