2016Nu7263 Revocation of Disposition of Imposition of Property Tax, etc.

A Religious Organizations

Chungcheongbuk-do

RepresentativeB

Attorney Jin-sik et al., Counsel for the defendant

The head of the Gu

The number of persons authorized by the litigation performer, the acceptance of the head, and the Gu

Daegu District Court Decision 2016Guhap21543 Decided November 22, 2016

September 8, 2017

September 29, 2017

1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The Defendant imposed property tax (housing) 114,960 won, local resource and facility tax (Housing) 7,820 won, local education tax 10,070 won, and property tax (Housing) 114,960 won, local resource and facility tax (Housing) 7,820 won, and local education tax 10,070 won on the building stated in attached Table 1, as of July 9, 2015, and the imposition of property tax (Housing) 114,960 won, local resource and facility tax 7,820 won, and local education tax 10,070 won shall be revoked.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant.

The text shall be as shown in the text.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On August 10, 2010, the Plaintiff, a religious organization, purchased a building indicated in the [Attachment 1] List of Real Estate (hereinafter “instant building”) adjacent to the “C Inspection, Daegu”) which is the inspector affiliated with it, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on September 14, 2010. At the time, the Plaintiff was exempted from acquisition tax, etc. on the ground that the instant building constitutes real estate acquired for the purpose of religious organization’s business.

B. After conducting a local business trip on June 25, 2015, the Defendant determined that the instant building does not constitute real estate used directly for religious purposes as of June 1, 2015, which is the property tax assessment basis date for the property tax of 2015. Moreover, the Defendant imposed property tax of 114,960 won, local resource and facility tax of 7,820 won, local education tax of 10,070 won, property tax of 114,960 won, local resource and facility tax of 7,820 won, local education tax of 2015 on September 9, 2015 (house), property tax of 114,960 won, local resource and facility tax of 7,820 won, local education tax of 10,070 won, respectively (hereinafter “each of the instant dispositions imposing taxes”).

C. The Plaintiff filed an appeal on October 5, 2015, but was dismissed by the Tax Tribunal on March 28, 2016.

[Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, 5 (including a branch number; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul

Each entry of evidence 1,2, and3 and the purport of the whole oral argument

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

Since the building of this case is used as a religious activity, such as a "C temple"'s religious association, and as a place of accommodation and a place of view for the winners dispatched to support the inspection operation of the C temple and the memorial activities in the general workers of the plaintiff's religious team, it constitutes "real estate used directly by a religious organization for the relevant business" under Article 50 (2) of the former Restriction of Special Local Taxation Act (amended by Act No. 13637, Dec. 29, 2015; hereinafter the same shall apply) and is subject to exemption from property tax, etc. Accordingly, the disposition of this case on different premise should be revoked as it is unlawful.

(b) Relevant statutes;

Attached 2 is as shown in the "related Acts and subordinate statutes".

C. Determination

1) Relevant legal principles

Article 50 (2) of the former Restriction of Special Local Taxation Act provides that real estate used directly by organizations for religious and religious purposes as of the third base date shall be exempted from property tax and local resource and facility tax under Article 146 (2) of the Local Tax Act. "Real estate is actually used directly for non-profit business." "Use of real estate for non-profit business" means that real estate is actually used directly for non-profit business, and the scope of "use for the business" is determined objectively based on the actual use relationship in consideration of the non-profit entrepreneur's business purpose and acquisition purpose. In addition, where a non-profit entrepreneur provides a company house or accommodation to its members, if the provision of the company house or accommodation is not directly related to the convenience of its members or staying in the country, it cannot be deemed that the company house or accommodation is used directly for the purpose of the non-profit entrepreneur's business, but if a partner of the non-profit entrepreneur is not necessary for the business activities of the non-profit entrepreneur and the nature of his/her business or stay in the company house or lodging is performed concurrently, it can be deemed directly used for the purpose business (see Supreme Court Decision 2515Du54.

2) Whether the instant building was directly used for the Plaintiff’s religious purpose business

A) The Plaintiff, a religious organization, constitutes “organization for religious and religious purposes” as stipulated under Article 50(1) and (2) of the former Restriction of Special Local Taxation Act, and further, whether the instant building is directly used for the Plaintiff’s religious purpose business as of the date when the instant building was imposed (as of June 1, 2015, Article 2(1)8 of the former Restriction of Special Local Taxation Act: The real estate owner uses the relevant real estate for business or business purposes or purposes).

B) the facts of recognition

① In around 2006, the Plaintiff established a “plan to expand the site for inspection by solar type C inspection (business period: January 1, 2006 to December 31, 2010)” with the content that the land for inspection located in Daegu City is so small that there is a lack of space to carry out the legal association or by winning the inspection by purchasing nearby real estate and to expand the inspection space.

② On August 10, 2010, the Plaintiff purchased the instant building located in the vicinity of the C temple in accordance with the said plan, and used it as a place or place for holding various legal meetings, etc. of its winners and believers, and provided them as a place or place for conducting the C temple’s inspection and religious activities under the Plaintiff’s control.

③ Since the Plaintiff’s end-up team supports the operation and activities of the inspection of all the nation’s end-up workers, it is inevitable for the Plaintiff to visit the inspection of C (the inspection of the Daegu representative type) more than 10 times a month, the Plaintiff’s end-up team was provided as the front-up, the front-up, the front-up, and the front-up of the event. The instant building was provided as the front-up, the front-up, the front-up, and the front-up, and the front-up.

④ After the Plaintiff acquired the instant building, the volume of electricity and water used in the instant building not only decreased much than the time when it was used as a multi-family house in the past, but also the decreased volume of water used is mostly concentrated on the day on which a Buddhist event, such as a private monthly file, etc., exists.

⑤ On September 17, 2014, a statement of business trip from September 17, 2014 and a statement of business trip from June 25, 2015, which was prepared by the Defendant’s public official in charge, are used as a residential space for winners or believerss, as well as on-site photographs (on-site photographs in each door room), such as TV, cooling house, fluor, candle, candle, fluor, etc., attached to each door room.

6. In accordance with the above site expansion plan, the Plaintiff owns buildings on each of the lots adjacent to the C temple, and the Defendant is exempt from property tax, etc. by recognizing that each of the buildings on each ground used as a storage for a religious assembly site or a storage for Buddhist goods among them is being directly used for religious purposes.

[Recognition] Fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 10, Eul evidence 1 to 7, each entry and Decree

(2) The purport of the whole pleading

C) Determination based on recognition, etc.

The following circumstances revealed by the facts of recognition, quoted evidence, and the purport of the entire pleadings, i.e., establishing an expansion plan for the temple space of the existing C temple to narrow the temple space and purchasing the building of this case in the vicinity, and allowing the plaintiff to use it as the venue or execution space of various legal societies and believers. It is limited to the religious organization's business as part of the religious organization's business. ② The plaintiff's religious group dispatched the inspection team's representative to the inspection team of Daegu to participate in the operation of the inspection and to supervise the association. ③ The plaintiff's religious organization's support for C temple is mainly functionally performed by its members, such as the plaintiff's deceased's deceased, etc. The plaintiff's religious business is also exempted from the plaintiff's religious business's use of the building of this case. As such, the plaintiff's religious business's use of the building of this case is also restricted from the plaintiff's new religious business's use of the building of this case as part of the plaintiff's religious business's religious business's use of the building of this case.

3) Sub-determination

Therefore, the instant building is subject to exemption from property tax, etc. under Article 50(2) of the former Restriction of Special Local Taxation Act. Therefore, the instant disposition on a different premise should be revoked as it is unlawful.

3. Conclusion

Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case shall be accepted on the grounds of its reasoning. Since the judgment of the court of first instance differs from this conclusion, it is unfair to accept the plaintiff's appeal and revoke the judgment of the court of first instance and decide to revoke the part concerning the disposition of this case. It is so decided

Written acceptance (Presiding Judge)

Freeboard Kim

x. Jark Sick Number

Attached Table 2

Relevant statutes

【Local Tax Act

Article 107 (Persons Liable to Pay Tax)

(1) A person who actually owns property as of the tax base date shall be liable to pay property tax.

Article 114 (Tax Base Date)

The tax base date of the property tax shall be the 1st of June each year.

Article 142 (Taxable Objects)

(1) Objects of taxation of local resource and facility tax are as follows:

2. Fire-fighting systems, garbage disposal facilities, irrigation facilities, or a building, ship, or a person who benefits from any other public facilities.

Land (hereafter referred to as "specific real estate" in this Chapter)

Article 143 (Person Liable for Tax Payment)

A person liable to pay local resource and facility tax shall be as follows:

7. Specific real estate: An owner of specific real estate;

Article 150 (Persons Liable to Pay Tax)

A person liable to pay local education tax shall be as follows:

6. A person liable to pay property tax (excluding the amount of property tax under Article 112 (1) 2 and (2));

Gu Restriction of Special Local Taxation Act (Amended by Act No. 13637, Dec. 29, 2015)

Article 2 (Definitions)

(1) The terms used in this Act shall be defined as follows:

8. The term "direct use" means that the owner of real estate uses the relevant real estate for business or business purposes or purposes.

institution means the institution.

Article 50 (Exemption for Religious Organizations and Organizations for Religious Affairs)

(1) Real estate acquired by organizations for religion and ancestral rites to use for their relevant projects shall be exempted from acquisition tax: Provided, That in any of the following cases, exempted taxes on the relevant portion shall be collected as a penalty:

1. Where it is used commercially;

2. Where such real estate is not used for the relevant purposes without just grounds, within three years from the date of acquisition;

(2) Property tax (including an amount imposed pursuant to Article 112 of the Local Tax Act) and local resource and facility tax under Article 146 (2) of the Local Tax Act on real estate (including land annexed to a building prescribed by Presidential Decree) used directly for the relevant business as of the tax base date (including where a religious or religious organization uses the real estate of a third party for the relevant business free of charge) shall be exempted, respectively, when it is used directly for the relevant business when it has been used for less than two years: Provided, That where it is used for profit-making business or a fee is charged for the use thereof, or where part of the relevant property is not used directly for the relevant business, it shall not be exempted for such property or part thereof.