Cho High 2016 Mine309 (Occ. 15, 2016)

The overdue interest of the buyer is included in the seller's transfer value.

It is consistent with the purport of Article 96 (1) of the Income Tax Act which provides that the transfer value shall be calculated based on the actual transaction price by deeming that the buyer's overdue interest is included in the seller'

Article 96 of the Income Tax Act

Gwangju District Court-2016-Gu Partnership-1223 (Law No. 29, 2016)

○ Kim

○ Head of tax office

2016.09.08

2016.09.29

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Cheong-gu Office

The Defendant’s disposition of imposition of capital gains tax of 2013 against the Plaintiff on December 1, 2015 is revoked.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On November 3, 2011, 201, the ○○○○○-dong ○○○○○○○○○○○○○, and 1,616 square meters (hereinafter referred to as “instant land”) were sold in the purchase price of KRW 00,000,000. However, the sales contract was concluded between the ○○○○○○○○○ and the sales contract to pay the remainder KRW 00,000,000 in four equal shares on the day of the contract, and the remainder KRW 00,000 in four equal shares.

B. On April 4, 2012, the Plaintiff decided to purchase the status of purchaser of the instant land from this○○○ in the purchase price of KRW 000,000,000, and obtained approval from the ○○ market on April 27, 201.

C. However, the Plaintiff delayed the performance of the obligation to pay the remainder of the sales price to ○○ Urban Construction, and as a result, there was an interest rate in the total of ○○ Won (hereinafter “interest rate”) until November 4, 2013.

D. After November 4, 2013, the Plaintiff sold the status of purchaser of the instant land to ○○ Development (hereinafter referred to as “○○○○ Development”). On the same day, ○○○ Development paid the remainder of the purchase price for the instant land to ○○ Urban Corporation on the same day, and the instant overdue interest was also paid.

E. The Plaintiff: (a) obtained the status of purchaser of the instant land from ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○, and transferred the land to

F. However, on December 1, 2015, the Defendant confirmed the fact that ○○ Development was obligated to pay the overdue interest in the instant case, and issued a disposition imposing KRW ○○○ on the Plaintiff on December 1, 2015, adding the instant overdue interest to the Plaintiff’s transfer value (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

G. The Plaintiff appealed and filed an administrative appeal with the Tax Tribunal on January 15, 2016, but was dismissed on March 15, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 to 6 (including each number if there is a serial number) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The plaintiff's assertion

According to a contract of succession made between the Plaintiff and ○○ Development, a transferee of ○○ Development succeeds to the Plaintiff’s status as the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff merely received ○○○○○○○ Development the down payment payment that was made to ○○○○○○○○○○○, and thus, the Plaintiff did not generate any income from the Plaintiff. In other words, ○○ Urban Corporation only paid the instant overdue interest to ○○ Development, a buyer who acquired the status of purchaser of the instant land regardless of the Plaintiff. In addition, Article 163(1)3 of the Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act should be construed not to include the interest paid to the seller due to the delay of the payment date of the transaction price agreed by the buyer, as the cost for acquisition. Accordingly, the instant disposition is an unlawful disposition contrary to

(b) Related statutes;

It is as shown in the attached Table related statutes.

C. Determination

1) In full view of the following circumstances, which are acknowledged in addition to the purport of the entire pleadings, i.e., ① ○○ Development paid the remainder of the purchase price on the day on which the Plaintiff acquired the status of purchaser of the instant land from the Plaintiff, as well as the interest rate in the instant case, ② The Plaintiff exempted the Plaintiff from the liability corresponding to the interest rate in the instant case; ③ Ultimately, deeming that the transfer price of the instant land is included in the interest rate in the transfer price of the purchaser’s status, corresponds to the purport of Article 96(1) of the Income Tax Act, which provides that the transfer price shall be calculated based on the actual transaction price, shall be included in the actual transaction price between the Plaintiff and ○○○ Development. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit.

3. Conclusion

The plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.