(a) Whether it falls under the requirements for collection of acquisition tax and registration tax which have been exempted under the proviso of Article 110-3 (1) and the proviso of Article 128-2 (1) of the former Local Tax Act (amended by Act No. 4415 of Dec. 14, 191) where the property acquired is sold within one year after being used directly for its own business;

B. Whether collection can be made pursuant to Article 112(2) and Article 112-3 of the same Act in the event it does not meet the requirements for collection under Paragraph (a) above (negative)

(a)"Where the acquired property is not used directly for the proper business within one year from the date of acquisition (registration date)" under the proviso of Article 110-3(1) and the proviso of Article 128-2(1) of the former Local Tax Act (amended by Act No. 4415 of Dec. 14, 191), which is a provision for collection of exempted acquisition tax and registration tax, includes cases where the acquired property is not used for the proper business without justifiable grounds within one year from the date of grace period, and where the acquired property is not used directly for the proper business within one year from the acquisition (registration date) without justifiable grounds, and where the acquired property is sold directly for the proper business within one year from the acquisition (registration) without justifiable grounds. However, in cases where the acquired property is sold after being used for the proper business within the grace period, the exempted registration tax and the acquisition tax shall not be collected additionally, unless there are special circumstances such as temporary, temporary and formal use.

(b)In order to collect exempted acquisition tax and further to collect acquisition tax by heavy rates on the land for non-business use of a legal entity, if exempted acquisition tax cannot be collected on the premise that it satisfies the requirements for additional collection of exempted acquisition tax on the first exempted acquisition tax on the premise that it falls under the requirements for additional collection of acquisition tax on the land for non-business use of a legal entity, additional collection under Articles 112 (2) and 112-3 of the same Act, which are provisions for excessive acquisition tax

A. The former Local Tax Act (amended by Act No. 4415 of Dec. 14, 191), the proviso to Article 110-3(1), and the proviso to Article 128-2(1) of the former Local Tax Act (amended by Act No. 4415 of Dec. 14, 191)

B. Supreme Court Decision 91Nu10725 delivered on June 9, 1992 (Gong1992, 2164)

Sacheon-Yacheon-Yacheon Livestock Industry Cooperatives (Attorneys Cho Jong-soo et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Samcheon City, Attorneys Lee Jae-ho et al., Counsel for defendant-appellee

Busan High Court Decision 91Gu25 delivered on April 15, 1992

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

According to the proviso of Article 110-3(1) and the proviso of Article 128-2(1) of the Local Tax Act (amended by Act No. 4415 of Dec. 14, 191), which provides for the collection of exempted acquisition tax and registration tax, where the acquired property is not used directly for its proper business without justifiable grounds within one year from the date of acquisition (registration date), the exempted acquisition tax shall be collected additionally. Here, where the acquired property is not used directly for its proper business within one year from the date of acquisition (registration date) without justifiable grounds, "if the acquired property is not used directly for its proper business within one year from the date of acquisition" shall not be used directly for its proper business without justifiable grounds within one year from the date of grace period, and where the acquired property is used directly for its proper business and sold within the above grace period, it shall not be subject to the exemption of registration tax, unless special circumstances exist, such as temporary use, temporary use, temporary use, etc.

In addition, it is on the premise that the exempted acquisition tax is collected and the exempted acquisition tax falls under the land for non-business use of a corporation again and the exempted subject falls under the requirements for collection of acquisition tax by heavy tax rate. If the exempted acquisition tax cannot be collected because it does not fall under the requirements for collection of acquisition tax, it cannot be collected additionally pursuant to Articles 112(2) and 112-3 of the Local Tax Act, which is the acquisition tax of non-business land of a corporation.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the plaintiff, as a cooperative established under the Livestock Industry Cooperatives Act, was unable to open a livestock market on August 24, 197, when Samcheon-si, which was entrusted with the management and operation of the livestock market on the land of this case and operated the livestock market on December 4, 1987, and the plaintiff's association obtained permission to open a livestock market under its own name on January 28, 1989 for the purpose of directly establishing the livestock market on the land of this case, and used the land as the site of this case by acquiring it from the Korea National Railroad Authority (the ownership transfer registration was conducted on April 11 of the same year) on February 27, 1989, and it was just for the court below to find that the land of this case was not subject to a temporary sale of the land of this case, since the above livestock market was located in the residential-centered area of Samcheon-si, and the amendment of the Livestock Industry Act was discussed from the time of the transfer of the livestock market, and there was no reason to use the plaintiff's new livestock market.

There is no error of misconception of facts or misapprehension of legal principles pointing out in the judgment of the court below. All arguments are without merit.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Song Man-man (Presiding Justice)