Whether the agricultural cooperatives are subject to the imposition of the real estate speculation control tax.

Income tax, business tax, and corporate tax on agricultural cooperatives under the Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption Act are exempted, but the Agricultural Cooperatives Act on the Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption of Agricultural Cooperatives is applied in preference to Article 8 of the Agricultural Cooperatives Act.

In conflict with this, the previous Supreme Court Decision (Supreme Court Decision 72Nu93 delivered on July 11, 72.7.10, Supreme Court Decision 72Nu154 delivered on October 10, 72.

Attorney Jeon Jong-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City et al.

The Head of the Maternization Tax Office

Seoul High Court Decision 72Gu231 delivered on May 16, 1973

We reverse the original judgment.

The case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

(1) The summary of the grounds of appeal Nos. 1-1 through 3 is as follows:

With respect to the duties of the Plaintiff Union, it is clear that the Agricultural Cooperatives Act is a special law to foster and protect the Plaintiff Association in light of the purpose of its establishment, and it is established by the Supreme Court (Supreme Court Decision 72Nu93 delivered on July 11, 1972, Supreme Court Decision 72Nu154 delivered on October 10, 1972), the original judgment was that the Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption Act takes precedence over the above Agricultural Cooperatives Act, and that it was rejected the Plaintiff’s assertion to the effect that there was no provision on tax exemption for the Plaintiff Association under the Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption Act.

Article 8 (1) of the Agricultural Cooperatives Act promulgated on July 29, 1961 provides that agricultural cooperatives shall be exempted from all taxes other than customs duties and goods taxes which are imposed on their business. However, Article 2 of the Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption Act, which enters into force on January 1, 1966 (Act No. 1723 of Dec. 20, 1965), provides that "no tax reduction and exemption shall be made unless this Act and treaties and the following Acts are prescribed," and the agricultural cooperatives shall be exempted from the income tax under Article 3 (1) 2 of the Agricultural Cooperatives Act, business taxes under Article 4 (1) 6 of the same Act, and those taxes under Article 4 (2) of the same Act, which shall be exempted from the corporate tax exemption and exemption for the purpose of the Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption Act, should be applied first of all in light of the purpose of the Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption and Exemption and the purpose of the Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption and Exemption Act, which shall be applied first of all to the Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption and Exemption Act.

On the other hand, it is legitimate to determine that the Plaintiff union is subject to the imposition of the same speculative restraint tax because there is no ground to exempt the Plaintiff union from the corresponding speculative restraint tax on the Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption Act and the Special Measures Act on the Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption and the Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption and the Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption on the Restriction of Tax Reduction and Exemption and the Special Measures on the Control of Real Estate Speculation Act. Therefore, it is not reasonable to conclude that the original judgment does not err in the interpretation of the laws and regulations, such as the essay paper, and that the previous party member judgment (Supreme Court Decision 72Nu93 delivered on July 11, 1972, Supreme Court Decision 72Nu154 delivered on

(2) The gist of the ground of appeal No. 1-4 is that the acquisition and disposal of real estate by the Plaintiff Union is for the collection of overdue loans, and thus, it is contrary to the tax principle to impose the speculative suppression tax to restrain the speculation of real estate. However, according to the special measure tax law on the suppression of real estate speculation, if profits arising from the transfer of land exist, it shall be subject to taxation immediately, and it shall not be determined whether there is speculative nature in the transfer itself. Thus, even though the acquisition and disposal of land in this case by the Plaintiff Union belong to the duties of the Plaintiff Union, the original judgment shall be subject to taxation only with gains on transfer. Accordingly, it cannot be said that there is any error in the misapprehension of the legal principle.

(3) We examine the second ground for appeal.

The plaintiff asserts in the complaint that "the disposition of imposition by the defendant is an illegal disposition against the express provision of the Act on Special Measures for the Control of Real Estate Speculative Measures," and again argued that there is no difference between the market price at the time of acquisition or transfer of the land at the time of transfer (79 tin) and that there is no transfer margin to impose real estate speculation control. It is clear that the plaintiff seeks a summons from the non-party witness Gap evidence 5-1 and the non-party witness's transfer margin. According to the plaintiff's proof, it can be seen that there is no difference between the real acquisition price and the transfer price of the land at the price of government notice and the transfer price of the land at the price of the land, and therefore, it is clear that the court below made this case taxation on the premise that the transfer price and the acquisition price of the land were converted into the transfer price at the price of government notice, and therefore, it can be seen that there is no substantial difference between the real transfer marginal profit and the transfer price at the time of transfer, and therefore, the court below's judgment should be reversed the above judgment as to be justified in its conclusion.

Justices Kim Jong-young (Presiding Justice)