Seoul Administrative Court 2016Guhap85569 ( October 26, 2017)

Whether the apartment of this case is subject to the exclusion of aggregate;

The Plaintiff’s comprehensive AA construction, a trustee, is not a housing constructor who has obtained a building permit under the Building Act, and the instant real estate cannot be deemed a housing unit built and owned by a housing constructor, and thus, the instant real estate does not constitute a housing unit excluded from the aggregate real estate tax

Article 8 of the Gross Real Estate Tax Base Act

Seoul High Court 2017Nu54724 Revocation of Disposition of Comprehensive Real Estate Holding Tax

BBBBB Corporation

Samsung Head of Samsung Tax Office

on October 26, 2017

November 22, 2017

on October 10, 2018

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

the Gu Office's place of service and place of service

1. Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance judgment is revoked. The Defendant’s imposition of KRW 00,000,000 and special rural development tax of KRW 0,000,000 for comprehensive real estate holding tax for the Plaintiff 20 XX. The imposition of KRW 00,000 for the Plaintiff (including additional tax) shall be revoked.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

This court's explanation on this case is the same as the entry of the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, and therefore, it is accepted in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act. (However, the 8th 6th 6th 6th 6th is "0,000,000 won for special rural development tax (including additional tax)", and the "amount of the 9th 4th 9th 4th "on the basis of the amount", respectively. The 11th 19-20th 11th 1st 1st 1th 1th 1th 1th 1th 1th 1th 1th 1th 1th 1th 19-

2. Consultations

Therefore, the judgment of the first instance court is legitimate, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.