Early High Court Decision 2009Du4236 (Law No. 102.05)

If the value of land and buildings is not divided, the value-added tax shall be revised in proportion to the value calculated according to the standard market price.

The disposition to correct the value-added tax in proportion to the value calculated according to the standard market price of land and buildings because only the total amount of the purchase price of the real estate is stated in the real estate sales contract and it can be recognized that there is no indication about the classification of the value of land and buildings, etc.

2010Guhap1976 Revocation of Disposition of Imposition of Value-Added Tax

1.김〇〇2.김△△3.김◇◇

〇〇세무서장

1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

A disposition to correct and impose value-added tax of KRW 92,430,320 on September 1, 2009 against Plaintiff KimA and KimB in 2006, and a disposition to correct and impose value-added tax of KRW 16,429,070 on Plaintiff KimCC in 2006 on the same day shall be revoked.

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiffs are those who engage in real estate rental business.

나. 원고들은 2006. 12. 18. 〇〇건설 주식회사(이하 '〇〇건설'이라 한다)로부터 〇〇〇〇구 〇〇동 59 대지 480㎡ 및 위 토지에 있는 지하 1층 지상 5층 '〇〇프라자' 건물(이하 위 토지와 건물을 각 '이 사건 토지', '이 사건 건물'이라 한다) 을 23억 원(부가가치세 별도)에 매수하면서, 계약금 1억 원은 계약시, 잔금 22억은 2006. 12. 29. 지급하기로 하였다(이하 '이 사건 매매'라 한다).

다. 원고들은 〇〇건설에 2006. 12. 18. 계약금 1억 원, 2006. 12. 28. 잔금을 지급하고, 2006. 12. 29. 이 사건 토지 및 건물에 관하여 소유권이전등기를 마쳤다.

D. On January 25, 2007, the Plaintiffs reported the value of supply of the building of this case at KRW 1.655 billion, and the value of supply of the land of this case at KRW 650 million (hereinafter “the instant declaration”).

E. Unlike the instant report on September 1, 2009, the Defendant: (a) deemed that the value of the instant land and building is unclear; and (b) accordingly, calculated in proportion to the value calculated according to the standard market price of the land and building pursuant to Article 48-2(4)1 of the Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act; (c) issued a disposition imposing the value-added tax of KRW 92,430,320 for 206 on Plaintiff KimA and KimB; and (d) imposed a disposition imposing the value-added tax of KRW 16,429,070 for 206 on Plaintiff KimCC (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 3, 5, 8, Eul 1, 3, 4, 7 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiffs' assertion

원고들은 〇〇건설로부터 이 사건 건물 및 토지를 구분하여 매수하였으므로, 피고가 이 사건 매매의 건물 및 토지 가액이 불분명하다고 하여 한 이 사건 처분은 위법하다.

3. Relevant statutes;

The entries in the attached Table-related statutes are as follows.

4. Determination

A. Principles

In cases of purchasing land and a building on its ground, where a sales contract is concluded at the price-fixing stage without separately stipulating the price of the land and the building on its ground, it cannot be said that the value of the land and the building on its ground becomes clear (see Supreme Court Decision 92Nu15499, Jul. 27, 1993).

In addition, in a case where the purchase and sale of the building site and its ground buildings are made by setting the price in a lump sum without distinguishing the value of the building site and its ground, barring special circumstances such as an agreement to pay the down payment, intermediate payment, and balance as the price for the respective site or the building part, the price for the building site and the building shall be deemed to have been paid at the time of each payment (see Supreme Court Decision 96Nu19550, Feb. 13, 199

B. Determination

1) 살피건대, 갑3, 4, 7, 11 내지 13호증(각 가지번호 포함)의 각 기재에 변론 전체의 취지를 종합하면 ① 이 사건 매매계약서에 매매대금 총액만 기재되어 있을 뿐 토지와 건물의 가액 구분에 관하여 아무런 기재가 없는 사실, ② 원고들이 매도인인 〇〇건설로부터 품목이 모두 건물매매대금이고 공급가액이 각 14억 원과 2억 5,000만 원인 세금계산서를 교부받은 사실을 인정할 수 있다.

Therefore, since the sale of this case constitutes a case where the value of the land and the building is not divided, it is legitimate to correct the value-added tax calculated in proportion to the value calculated according to the standard market price of the land and the building pursuant to Article 48-2(4)1 of the Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act.

2) 한편, 갑8호증의2의 기재에 의하면 이 사건 매매의 잔금 영수증에 건물 분 16억 5,000만 원이라고 기재된 사실은 인정되나, ① 계약금 및 잔금 지급기일의 차이가 약 11일에 불과한데 영수증 지급방식이 상이한 점(갑8호증의1, 2), ② 이 사건 매매 직전 인 2005사업연도의 〇〇건설 대차대조표에 의하면 토지가액이 1,262,501,425원, 건물가액이 622,118,790원이어서 원고들이 신고한 토지, 건물 가액과 상이한 점(을 5호증), ③ 2006. 10. 31. 기준시가도 토지 7억 2,960만 원, 건물 451,097,850원로 원고들의 신고가액과 상이한 점(을9호증의1)에 비추어 보면, 위 인정사실만으로는 이 사건 매매에서 토지와 건물의 가액이 구분되어 있지 아니한 사실을 뒤집기 부족하다.

3) Therefore, this part of the plaintiffs' assertion is without merit.

5. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiffs' claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.