beta
Case Number of the immediately preceding lawsuit
District Court-2017-Gu Partnership-1928 ( December 27, 2017)
Case Number of the previous trial
Cho Jae-2016-China-1537 ( October 27, 2016)
Title
The value of the transferor's report shall be appropriate in the criminal judgment of forging private documents of the purchaser of land.
Summary
For the purpose of reducing transfer margin, the Plaintiff’s transfer value is reasonable, since the Plaintiff was indicted by forging a contract on the rights and duties in a blind real estate sales contract, which was obtained in advance from the Plaintiffs, and was sentenced to three years of imprisonment by confession at the last day.
Cases
2018Nu33045 Revocation of disposition, etc. of imposition of capital gains tax
Plaintiff, Appellant
AA, BB
Defendant, appellant and appellant
AA, BB Head of the Tax Office
Judgment of the first instance court
Suwon District Court Decision 2017Guhap11928 Decided December 26, 2017
Conclusion of Pleadings
May 10, 2018
Imposition of Judgment
June 7, 2018
Text
1. All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.
Purport of claim and appeal
1. Purport of claim
The imposition of capital gains tax of KRW 289,208,360 on March 18, 2016 by the director of the tax office of defendant AA against the plaintiff AA on March 18, 2016 shall be revoked. The imposition of capital gains tax of KRW 311,181,580 on March 9, 2016 by the director of the tax office of defendant BB against the plaintiff BB on March 9, 2016 shall be revoked.
2. Purport of appeal
The judgment of the first instance is revoked, and all plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;
The reasons for this court's decision are as follows: "10,11" of the 4th 12th 12th 12th 12th 12th 4th 4th 4th 11th 5th 5th 11th 5th 11th 1st 2th 2th 2 years and 6th 2th 6th 6th 6th 2th 100, respectively, on the ground that the appellate court's appeal was reversed by the CCC's appeal on the ground of unfair sentencing, and thus, the appellate court's decision was affirmed by Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act
2. Conclusion
Since the judgment of the first instance is justifiable, the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is groundless.