logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2015.08.20 2014구합5013
양도소득세부과처분취소
Text

1. All of the instant lawsuits are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff reported and paid capital gains tax (1) around October 6, 2004, the Plaintiff is deemed to be the entire land of this case, 16,266 square meters in Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-do (hereinafter “instant entire land”).

1) Of the shares 13224/1626 (hereinafter “instant land”).

2) On the same day, D purchased the remainder of the entire land of this case, and D purchased the remainder of the entire land of this case, and the Plaintiff and D around July 14, 2005, the entire land of this case is E and F (hereinafter “E, etc.”).

(2) After selling the instant land to E, etc., the Plaintiff reported and paid the transfer income tax with the transfer value of KRW 14,633,714, and the acquisition value of KRW 11,040,000.

B. On June 1, 2011, E, etc. sold the entire land of the instant case to ES Industry Development Co., Ltd. on September 10, 2008, and reported the acquisition value of KRW 442,80,000. Defendant Ulsan District Tax Office determined that KRW 14,633,714, the transfer value of the instant land reported by the Plaintiff, is not the actual transaction value, and Defendant Ulsan District Tax Office conducted a tax investigation with the Plaintiff from April 25, 201 to May 9, 2011. (2) Defendant Ulsan District Tax Office imposed the transfer value of the instant land of KRW 359,989,376, the acquisition value of the instant land of KRW 27,325,148, the conversion value, and the transfer value of KRW 277,325,68, the conversion value to the Plaintiff on May 11, 2011.

3. After June 1, 201, the head of Ulsan District Tax Office imposed capital gains tax of KRW 65,226,710 on the Plaintiff in 205, and the Plaintiff paid capital gains tax of KRW 65,226,710.

C. On August 1, 2013, the head of Ulsan District Tax Office, who issued a disposition of correction, applied the actual transaction value, not the conversion value, rather than the conversion value. After calculating the transfer income tax on the premise that the actual transaction value is KRW 11,040,00, the transfer income tax amount was additionally imposed on the Plaintiff on August 1, 2013.

arrow