logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2016.05.26 2015구합76032
취득세등부과처분취소의 소
Text

1. The acquisition tax 20,293,980 won on November 11, 2014, additional tax 13,349,370 won, and the special rural development tax 3,364.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The plaintiff is a legal entity established on August 28, 1995 with the purpose of manufacturing and repairing the unmanned robot pester, service business, development of new and renewable energy-related technology and operation supply business, manufacturing and supply of solar power generation facilities, LED manufacturing and sales business, and manufacturing of agricultural machinery and equipment, and the head office is Ycheon City B.

B. On March 17, 2010, the Plaintiff purchased, on April 1, 2010, the Yangcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government building of 3 457.2 square meters and 1st and underground floors, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on April 1, 2010. The Plaintiff reported and paid acquisition tax of 58,349,040 won, special rural development tax of 5,834,90 won, registration tax of 58,349,040 won, and local education tax of 11,669,80 won, respectively.

C. On August 6, 2010, the Plaintiff extended the portion of 199.92 square meters on the third floor of the above building (hereinafter “the instant extension”). On November 5, 2010, the Plaintiff completed the extension registration. The Plaintiff reported and paid acquisition tax on the instant extension portion, KRW 2,04,790, KRW 204,470, KRW 204,470, and KRW 817,910, and KRW 163,580, and KRW 163,580, respectively.

As a result of conducting a tax investigation with the Plaintiff on April 18, 2011, the Defendant additionally imposed acquisition tax of KRW 5,360,210 on the portion of the building and KRW 536,010 on September 10, 201 by applying the heavy taxation rate under Article 112(3) of the former Local Tax Act (wholly amended by Act No. 1021, Mar. 31, 2010; hereinafter “former Local Tax Act”) on the ground that the instant extension portion constitutes “real estate for business of the head office”, and the Plaintiff did not object to such tax.

E. On November 11, 2014, on the ground that the Defendant did not impose acquisition tax, etc. on the land annexed to the instant extension, the Defendant additionally imposed acquisition tax 20,293,980 won, additional tax 13,349,370 won, special rural development tax, 3,364,310 won on the Plaintiff.

(f) The Plaintiff is dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal on January 25, 2015, but the Tax Tribunal on August 25, 2015.

arrow