A. Whether the amendment of Article 84-3(3) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 10663 of Dec. 31, 1981) and the non-taxable practice continue to exist

B. Whether Article 2 (3) of the Addenda to the land acquired prior to the amendment of the Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act is applied to the land for sale

A. Despite the provisions of subparagraph 3 of Article 84-3 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 10663 of Dec. 31, 1981), the tax authorities have interpreted and applied non-taxation practices by interpreting that the land is owned itself and it cannot be regarded as non-business land regardless of its holding period. However, as the Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act was amended by Ordinance No. 10663 of Dec. 31, 1981, the land for sale (including land for housing construction) acquired by the said corporation under subparagraph 3 of Article 84-3 of the Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act provides that it shall be a non-business land unless it is directly used for its own purpose without justifiable reasons within three years from the date of its acquisition. Thus, the amended Enforcement Decree has broken down such non-taxation practices after the enforcement of the Local Tax Act.

B. According to the amendment of Article 84-3 subparagraph 3 of the Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act, even if the non-taxable practice has been broken without being maintained any longer, this is applicable after the enforcement of the above amendment, and even if Article 2 (3) of the Addenda of the Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act provides, it shall not be construed as a provision that retroactively destroys the established non-taxable practice, so long as the non-taxable practice of a corporation acquired prior to the enforcement of the above amendment is recognized, the provisions of the Addenda of the Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act shall be excluded.

(a)(b)Article 18(3) of the Framework Act on National Taxes; Article 84-3(3)(b) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act (Presidential Decree No. 10663, Dec. 31, 1981); Article 2(3) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act (Presidential Decree No. 10663, Dec. 31, 1981);

DF Housing Development Co., Ltd. (Gu trade name: DF)

Attorney Lee Jae-ho, et al., Counsel for the defendant

Seoul High Court Decision 85Gu554 delivered on November 23, 1985

Supreme Court Decision 84Nu781 Decided May 14, 1985

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. We examine the grounds of appeal Nos. 1 and 3.

According to the decision of the court below, since the plaintiff corporation which is conducting real estate sales business or civil construction business as its purpose business, acquired the land of this case at the time of December 11, 1979. The defendant, the tax authorities, applied the heavy tax rate (20/100/750) under Article 112 (2) of the Local Tax Act because the land of this case constitutes non-business land of the corporation. The court below stated that the above provision of subparagraph 3 of Article 84-3 of the Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act, which provides for the definition of non-business land of the corporation, was enforced for 6 months from the date of acquisition or for 6 months from the date of acquisition, and stated that the above provision of this case was not applied to the land of this case for non-business purpose, and that the above provision of this case was not applied to the land of this case for non-business purpose within 3 months from the date of non-business purpose or because it was not used directly for the housing construction business of this case. The court below did not accept the above provision of non-business practice within 6 months.

2. We examine the second ground for appeal.

Article 18(3) of the Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act provides that if there is an amendment of the tax-related Act, the taxation requirements at the time of the enactment of the tax-related Act shall be applied automatically under the legal principle, and the interpretation of the tax-related Act or practices in tax administration shall be legitimate after the tax has been generally accepted by taxpayers, and any acts (or calculation) by such interpretation or practices shall not be levied retroactively by new interpretation or practices (Article 18(3) of the Framework Act on National Taxes). As such, Article 84-3(3) of the Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act is amended, even if the above-mentioned non-taxation practices generally accepted by taxpayers according to the interpretation of the tax authorities cannot be maintained any longer, it shall be applied after the enforcement of the above amendment, and Article 2(3) of the Addenda of the Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act provides that "the provisions of Article 84-3(3) shall be applied from the date of the enforcement of this Decree to the land acquired at least six months (three years prior to the enforcement date of this Decree). It shall not be construed to the amendment of the previous rule of the Housing Construction Act.

3. Therefore, the appeal of this case is without merit, and it is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Kim Jong-sik (Presiding Justice)