logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 1991. 2. 26. 선고 88누6825 판결
[양도소득세등부과처분취소][공1991.4.15.(894),1108]
Main Issues

Whether the cost of construction of housing sites paid to the seller at the time of purchase of land constitutes the cost of installation and improvement, which are necessary expenses deducted from the transfer value under Article 45 (1) 2 of the Income Tax Act (affirmative)

Summary of Judgment

The cost of construction of housing sites paid to a seller at the time of purchase of land shall be the cost of installation and improvement that are necessary expenses deducted from the transfer value under Article 45 (1) 2 of the Income Tax Act.

[Reference Provisions]

Article 45 (1) 2 of the Income Tax Act, Article 94 (2) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act

Reference Cases

[Plaintiff-Appellant-Appellee] Plaintiff 1 and 1 other (Law Firm Gyeong, Attorneys Park Jae-soo et al., Counsel for plaintiff-appellant-appellee)

Plaintiff-Appellee

Fixtures

Defendant-Appellant

Permanent Residence of Head of Tax Office

Judgment of the lower court

Daegu High Court Decision 87Gu13 delivered on May 11, 1988

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal by the defendant litigant are examined.

The decision of the court below that recognized the facts of the decision and judged that the construction cost of housing site paid to the seller when the plaintiff purchased the land in this case constitutes the necessary auction facility cost and improvement cost which are deducted from the transfer value pursuant to Article 45 (1) 2 of the Income Tax Act shall be justified, and there is no violation of the rules of evidence and the incomplete hearing, which points out in the theory of lawsuit, and there is no reason for this issue, and the remainder of the grounds for appeal is the attack on the family decision of the court below, which is premised on the case where the argument in this case is well-grounded. Therefore

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed and all costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Choi Jae-ho (Presiding Justice)

arrow