logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2015.06.17 2014구합20263
양도소득세등부과처분취소
Text

1. The Defendant imposed capital gains tax of KRW 82,384,600 (including additional tax) on the Plaintiff on June 1, 2013.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On May 26, 201, the Plaintiff entered into an agreement with the superintendent of education on the compensation of 1,673 square meters of B forest land, C forest land, and 630 square meters of land owned by himself/herself (hereinafter referred to as “land number”) and the building on the land, etc., and completed the registration of transfer of ownership on B and C’s land on the same day by consultation.

B. On August 1, 2011, the Plaintiff reported transfer income tax to the Defendant, and calculated the acquisition value of B and C as KRW 572,073,160, which is the conversion value of B and C, and among them, the details of the building 956.3 square meters in total are as follows.

2.(c)

2) As described in paragraph (1) (hereinafter referred to as “instant building”).

(C) On the grounds that there is no objective evidence to verify the new construction year of the instant building after conducting a comprehensive audit with the Defendant around March 2013, the head of the Daegu Regional Tax Office notified the Defendant of re-assessment of the conversion acquisition value by regarding the new construction year of the instant building in 1985 as the new construction year of the instant building. Accordingly, on June 1, 2013, the Defendant calculated the conversion acquisition value by 253,338,460 won for the new construction year of the instant building in 1985, and then reported and paid capital gains tax of 83,595,710 won and special rural development tax of 4,179,780 won.

(e) The Plaintiff is dissatisfied with the Plaintiff’s appeal on August 7, 2013, but on November 15, 2013, the Tax Tribunal rendered a decision to dismiss the Plaintiff. 【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, Gap’s 1, 5, 7, 8, 13, Eul’s 1, 6, and 8 (each entry, including each number, and the purport of the entire pleadings).

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

arrow