Suwon District Court 2014Guhap56643 (O. 16, 2015)

In the case of a blanket transfer, the value shall be distributed proportionally to the standard market price ratio at the time of transfer.

When comprehensively considering the fact that the transfer value of land and buildings is not deemed to have been classified by objective criteria, such as the appraised value, etc., the claimant shall be deemed to have transferred en bloc, and the disposition imposing the transfer income tax in proportion to the standard market price at the time

Article 96 of the Income Tax Act

Seoul High Court 2015Nu60534 (Law No. 17, 2016)

김@@

○ Head of tax office

Suwon District Court Decision 2014Guhap56643 Decided September 16, 2015

2016.05.20

oly 2016.17

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

1. Purport of claim

The Defendant’s imposition of KRW 472,375,030 in total on September 2, 2013 against the Plaintiff on September 2, 2013 is revoked.

2. Purport of appeal

The judgment of the first instance is revoked, and the plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

1. Quotation of the reasons for the judgment of the first instance;

This judgment is based on the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for adding the following matters to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it is based on Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the

○ On the 7th page, the following shall be added:

(4) The Defendant asserts that the transfer value of the sales contract on the instant land and building includes the value of business rights, and that the said sales contract constitutes a case where the distinction between the value of the land and the building is unclear, since only the value of the land and the building exists and the value of the business rights is unclear. However, there is insufficient evidence to acknowledge that the Defendant’s submission of the materials alone includes a separate business rights value that cannot be included in the value of the land and the building in the transfer value of the said sales contract. In addition, the Defendant’s disposition is based on the premise that the transfer value of the said sales contract is the total value of the land

2. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case shall be accepted as it is reasonable, and the judgment of the court of first instance shall be just and the defendant's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.