National Tax Service Review and Transfer 2011-0213 (Law No. 29, 2011)

In case where one side of the married couple concludes a sales contract, and the other side acquires by succession, the reduction or exemption of newly-built house shall not apply

Under the provisions on reduction and exemption for the acquisition of newly-built house, a person who first concludes a sales contract with a housing constructor and pays the down payment shall not be interpreted as meaning an individual, but it shall not be interpreted as a household where the husband concludes a sales contract and pays the down payment, and the husband succeeds to 1/2 of the shares from the husband

Article 99 of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act

2011Gudan31560 Revocation of Request for Correction of Transfer Income Tax

KimAAA

Head of the District Tax Office

June 5, 2012

July 3, 2012

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

The defendant's rejection disposition against the plaintiff on May 13, 201 is revoked.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On June 28, 199, CB, the husband of the Plaintiff, entered into a sales contract in which OOOO 0000 O-dong 0000 (hereinafter “the apartment of this case”) in Gangnam-gu Seoul (hereinafter “OOOO 0000”), and (b) on December 20, 199, the Plaintiff acquired 1/2 shares of the apartment of this case from OD with the approval of the non-party company, acquired 1/2 shares of the right to sell the apartment of this case, and changed the name of the buyer into O 1/2 shares of the Plaintiff and UD joint (each 1/2 shares) with the non-party company.

C. After that, on December 10, 2002, the plaintiff and CDR jointly completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the apartment of this case and owned it, and on April 30, 2010, transferred the apartment of this case to 000 won, and made a preliminary return of transfer income tax after transferring the apartment of this case to 000 won, and RD applied the provision of Article 99(1)2 of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act (hereinafter "the special provision of this case") to 00 won calculated tax amount, but the plaintiff paid 00 won of transfer income tax without filing an application for reduction or exemption.

D. On March 17, 2011, the Plaintiff filed a request for correction of capital gains tax to the effect that the Plaintiff’s case constitutes a special provision of the instant case, and the Defendant, on May 13, 2011, refused to file a request for correction on the ground that the Plaintiff’s successor to the right to sell the apartment of the instant case, who entered into the first sales contract with the housing constructor during the acquisition period of the newly-built house under the special provision of the instant case, and is not a person who made the payment for contract pride (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Ground of Recognition] The facts without dispute, the entries in Gap evidence l through 9 (including each of the natural disasters), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The plaintiff asserts that the disposition of this case is unlawful for the following reasons.

(1) The apartment of this case was jointly purchased by the plaintiff and DoD, and only after entering into a sales contract under the name of DoD, her husband at the time of the sales contract, it was changed to the name of the plaintiff and DoD joint.

(2) Of the special provisions of this case or the requirements for newly-built house subject to Article 99-3 of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act, "a person who concludes the first sales contract and pays the down payment" shall be interpreted by the unit of "household" instead of "individual". The plaintiff constitutes one household as a Dod couple with a Dod couple, and even the plaintiff acquired by succession from the Doddd Dod Do, which first concluded the sales contract.

B. Determination

(1) Relevant regulations, legal principles, etc.

Article 99(1)2 of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act (Special Provisions in this case) provides that "where a house acquired from a housing construction business operator is transferred five years after the acquisition date of a newly-built house, a tax amount equivalent to 100/100 of capital gains tax shall be reduced, and where a house is transferred five years after the acquisition date of the newly-built house, the amount of capital gains tax generated for five years from the acquisition date of the newly-built house shall be deducted from the income subject to capital gains tax," and where a house is transferred after five years from the acquisition date of the newly-built house, the period of acquisition of the first-built house (from May 22, 1998 to June 30, 199, and from May 22, 199 to December 31, 199, and from May 22, 199 to December 31, 199, the interpretation of tax laws shall not be interpreted in accordance with the principle of no taxation without the law without the law without the exception of the special circumstances.

(2) Whether the Plaintiff constitutes the special provisions of this case

First, the plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff and Doddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd. for the first time, there is no evidence to acknowledge it.

C. Sub-committee

Therefore, since the plaintiff does not meet the requirements for reduction or exemption under the special provisions of this case, the disposition of this case reported as such is legitimate.

3. Conclusion

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