logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2012. 12. 13. 선고 2012두18226 판결
대물변제에 따라 토지를 취득한 것으로 인정되므로 채권액이 실지거래가액에 해당함[국패]
Case Number of the immediately preceding lawsuit

Daegu High Court 2012Nu219 ( March 20, 2012)

Case Number of the previous trial

Cho High 201-Gu1024 (201.09)

Title

Since it is recognized that land is acquired by payment in kind, the amount of claim falls under the actual transaction price.

Summary

Since the value of claims is recognized in the settlement of money invested in real estate development, etc. and the ownership is acquired by the contract to transfer the ownership in lieu of the repayment, it is illegal to calculate the converted value on the ground that the amount of claims settled falls under the actual transaction price at the time of acquisition

Cases

2012du1826 revocation of disposition of imposing capital gains tax.

Plaintiff-Appellee

jAA

Defendant-Appellant

Head of Dong Daegu Tax Office

Judgment of the lower court

Daegu High Court Decision 2012Nu219 decided July 20, 2012

Imposition of Judgment

December 13, 2012

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined.

Article 97 (1) 1 (a) and (b) of the former Income Tax Act (amended by Act No. 9897 of Dec. 31, 2009) provides that the acquisition value among necessary expenses to be deducted from the transfer value shall be based on the actual transaction value required for the acquisition of assets in the calculation of transfer margin of a resident, and where it is impossible to confirm the actual transaction value at the time of acquisition, it shall be based on the transaction example, appraisal value, or conversion value. The court below acknowledged the facts as stated in its reasoning based on the adopted evidence. The court below determined that the plaintiff and the BB made settlement of the money invested in the real estate development, etc. of this case by the plaintiff on Nov. 15, 2005 and agreed to transfer the ownership of the land of this case to the plaintiff in lieu of the payment, the court below's determination is just in light of the provisions on the transfer margin of this case and the records, and thus, it is not erroneous in the misapprehension of the acquisition value as otherwise alleged in the ground of appeal.

arrow