b In the case of total method, whether the building value is included in the rental fee and, if included, the method of calculating rents.

b. In the case of total method, the value of the building is included in the rental fee, but the value-added tax base cannot be calculated.

Article 15 of the Corporate Tax Act, Article 13 of the Value-Added Tax Act

Incheon District Court 2015Guhap50256 ( October 29, 2015)

There is no provision regarding the removal of buildings, and the plaintiff has no benefit in return.

Therefore, it is difficult to view that the Plaintiff agreed to acquire ownership of the instant building.

Even if the rent for the site of the instant building was separately received, the instant office

The case in this case that the plaintiff agreed to acquire ownership of the building of this case in the Si Convention

Land rent, which is substantially related to the lease of the land to the site of the stables;

It is reasonable to view that the payment falls under the follow-up payment.

① Under the instant concession agreement, the land use period for the instant buildings is terminated.

At the same time, the ownership of the instant building belongs to the Plaintiff, and the lessee of the instant building is determined.

If the building in this case continues to be used or benefiting from the building after the end of the period of land use;

In consultation with the Plaintiff, it was determined to be used (Article 6).

(2) The instant concession agreement shall terminate with the expiration of the land use period, and the land use period.

Upon expiration of the period of land use, the lessee of this case shall not later than six months before the expiration of the period of land use.

The Plaintiff agreed to conduct a facility inspection jointly with the designated entity (Article 116).

§ 6).

③ Under the instant concession agreement, the ownership of the instant building shall accrue as above.

In addition to the above provision, the lessee of this case determined to pay the Plaintiff the amount calculated by multiplying the officially announced land price by 50/1,000 as annual land usage fee.

④ As a result of the Plaintiff’s commission of appraisal of the instant buildings, the instant buildings

of 37% of the value of new construction even after the expiration of the period of land use.

was assessed as follows.

2) Feasibility of appraisal and assessment of the instant buildings

A) Matters on the appraisal and assessment of property and rights, such as appraisers and land, buildings, movable property, etc.

The Public Notice of Values and Appraisal of Real Estate Act ("the Public Notice of Values and Appraisal of Real Estate Act")

In order to ensure the fairness and rationality of appraisal, the principles and standards to be observed by an appraisal business entity shall be determined by Ordinance of the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport, and accordingly the rules on appraisal provide for the principles and standards to be observed when an appraisal business entity conducts an appraisal.Article 11 of the rules on appraisal provides that an appraisal business entity shall conduct an appraisal in accordance with the cost method, comparison method and profit method, Article 15 provides that an appraisal business entity shall apply the cost method when an appraisal of a building is conducted, and the cost method shall be applied when an appraisal business entity conducts an appraisal of a building in accordance with the cost method and the order of

B) In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the statement No. 5 No. 5, the Plaintiff’s building of this case

The fact that appraisal has been requested for by the Korean Appraisal Board, the Korean Appraisal Board 00

The rate of increase in the production rate and the ratio of increase in construction cost on the basis of the refinancing cost for the instant buildings.

Considering the expiration of the land use period, a reduction in the cost after calculating the refinancing price at the expiration of the land use period;

Under the law, the value at the time of expiration of the land use period of the instant building shall be KRW 000.

Article 15 of the Rules on the Appraisal and Evaluation concerning the method of determining the appraised.

The value of the instant structure was assessed according to the cost method, which is the method of assessing the building set forth in the section.

, unlike appraisal and assessment of general aggregate buildings, only buildings other than land shall be assessed.

in consideration of the similarity cases after the expiration of the period and the difficulty in calculating the net income.

It may be recognized that the opinion that the method of comparison and the method of return did not take the method of appraisal has been expressed.

(c)

In light of the provisions of the above laws and regulations on the appraisal method, the building of this case

It does not appear that there was error in calculating the value of these buildings. The content of the building asserted by the Plaintiff.

(2) If the depreciation, etc. of the building is included in the early cost under the accounting principles of repair;

It does not properly reflect the name of the actual building in the value of one purpose, and the above service life is not the same.

The plaintiff's assertion that the appraisal value of the instant building is excessive due to the expiration of the contract

The argument is without merit.

3) Determination on the part of each of the disposition of refusal in this case

A) Article 71(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Corporate Tax Act by delegation under Article 40(2) of the Corporate Tax Act

The business year in which earnings and losses accrue due to the lease in mountain shall be the business year which includes the date in the following subparagraphs:

(b) if the period of payment of rent exceeds one year, a response shall be made during the period that has already elapsed.

The amount equivalent to the rent and expenses shall be deemed as earnings and losses for the concerned business year, respectively.

Article 41 (1) 1 of the Corporate Tax Act stipulates that if the date of payment of rent is determined by a contract, etc., the date of such payment shall be the date of payment.

Article 72 (1) of the Enforcement Decree (amended by Presidential Decree No. 25194, Feb. 21, 2014; hereinafter the same) provides for the methods of calculating the acquisition value of assets purchased, manufactured, produced, constructed, invested in kind, assets, stocks, etc. under subparagraphs 1 through 51 of Article 72 (1) of the Enforcement Decree (amended by Presidential Decree No. 25194, hereinafter the same)

The acquisition value of assets acquired by the method shall be the market value at the time of acquisition.

B) After the expiration of the land use period for the instant buildings, the Plaintiff’s instant buildings

of this case for the acquisition of ownership of the land of this case, the subsequent payment of land rent shall be made.

As seen earlier, the rejection disposition of this case is in accordance with the aforementioned provisions.

Article 71 of the Enforcement Decree of the Corporate Tax Act in calculating the tax base of each corporate tax subject to section 71.

When the period of land use expires pursuant to the proviso to paragraph (1) and Article 72 (1) 6 (former 5);

Of the market prices of the instant buildings, the part corresponding to the business year shall be included in gross income.

(see Supreme Court Decision 2008Du18939, Jun. 30, 201). Therefore, there was no error in the part regarding each corporate tax in the instant refusal disposition rendered with the same purport.

4) Determination on each part of the instant refusal disposition is about the value-added tax

A) The former Value-Added Tax Act (Amended by Act No. 9915, Jan. 1, 2010; hereinafter the same)

The main sentence of Article 13 (1) shall be the tax base for value-added taxes on the supply of goods or services:

"The sum of the values in each subparagraph shall be the sum of the values in each subparagraph, and "if the consideration is paid in money," in subparagraph 1, and "the market value of goods or services supplied by the supplier in cases of receiving any consideration other than money" in subparagraph 2, respectively.

B) The Plaintiff agreed to acquire ownership of the instant building.

Since it is the nature of the late payment of the land rent for buildings as seen earlier, the end is the same.

This part provides the Plaintiff with the services on the lease of the land, which is the land of the building in this case.

It is reasonable to view that the consideration was paid. In light of the foregoing provisions, this is reasonable to consider that the consideration was given.

The tax base of each value-added tax subject to a rejection disposition shall be Article 13(1) of the former Value-Added Tax

subsection (2) of this section, which shall be calculated under subsection (2) of this section, and among the lease services of the above land

It is difficult to separately calculate the market price of the part in relation to the transfer and payment.

The lower limit of the money in the name of the rent actually received from the lessee of this case

The total market price list of land rental services supplied for each taxable period for each taxable period;

No person may be treated as quasi-incompetent (see Supreme Court Decision 2008Du18939, Jun. 30, 201).

In addition, the Parties support the objective tax base and tax amount until the closing of the fact-finding proceedings.

the head of the agency, and the reasonable amount of tax to be imposed lawfully by such data

When calculating, only the portion exceeding the legitimate tax amount shall be revoked, but this shall not apply.

(2) If the tax disposition is not imposed, the court has no choice but to cancel the tax disposition in its discretion.

The duty to calculate the reasonable amount of tax to be imposed actively is not also the duty to calculate the amount of tax (Supreme Court Decision 195.

4. 28. See, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 94Nu13527.

Therefore, the part on each of the instant refusal disposition is actually related to the value added tax in each taxable period.

Although the market price of the supplied land rental service should be calculated as the tax base, the buildings of this case

Value-added tax on the value of the expiration date of land use period for the land use period divided in proportion to the land use period.

The lower court erred by calculating the tax base of the instant case, but the data alone submitted until the closing of the argument.

Since a legitimate tax base cannot be calculated, each of the instant refusal disposition is related to value-added tax.

The entire part shall be revoked.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is justified within the scope of the above recognition, and the remaining claims are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Incheon000 Corporation

00. Head of tax office

2015.08.27

October 29, 2015

1. Each disposition rejecting correction of value-added tax for the second period of 2008 against the Plaintiff on September 6, 2013, and value-added tax for the first period of 2009, respectively, shall be revoked.

2. The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.

3. 9/10 of the costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff, and the remainder by the Defendant, respectively.

The rejection of correction of the corporate tax for the business year of 2008, the corporate tax for the business year of 2009, the corporate tax for the business year of 2010, the corporate tax for the business year of 2010, the corporate tax for the business year of 2011, the corporate tax for the business year of 2012, the value-added tax for the second period of 2008, the value-added tax for the second period of 2008, and the value-added tax for the first period of 209 shall be revoked.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is a domestic corporation business operator running a transportation-related service business. With respect to the design, construction, and sale of office-use facilities in Incheon 000 International Business Area between the Plaintiff and a corporation such as hotel network, etc. (hereinafter referred to as the “Lessee of this case”), the Plaintiff entered into a concession agreement for the hotel facility business with the contents that the lessee of this case transfers the building of this case to the Plaintiff after the expiration of the period of use (hereinafter referred to as the “instant concession agreement”).

B. The Plaintiff included the pro rata value of the instant building in its gross income for the period of land use, as the tax base for value-added tax, and reported and paid each corporate tax for the second period of 2008, and the first period of 2009. The Defendant, on June 21, 2013, assessed the value of the instant building for the other taxable period (2003, 2004, corporate tax for the second period of 2003, and value-added tax for the second period of 207) of the instant concession agreement (the value of the instant building at the end of 200,000 won and the second period of 200, 2008, 200, 200, 200, 200, 30,0000, 20,0000, 20,0000, 20,0000,000,000).

F. On November 25, 2013, the Plaintiff, who was dissatisfied with the instant refusal disposition, filed a petition for trial with the Tax Tribunal, but was dismissed on October 28, 2014.

2. Whether the disposition of refusal of this case is legitimate or not as a whole, in the absence of dispute, Gap's 1 to 5, Eul's 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

A. The plaintiff's assertion

1) The Plaintiff actually received a reasonable level of land rent, and the agreement to take over the ownership of the instant building after the expiration of the land use period for the instant building is merely a means to facilitate removal, and it does not intend to acquire the value of the instant building. Therefore, it cannot be deemed that the ownership of the instant building is transferred to the Plaintiff after the rent for the land is transferred to the Plaintiff. Accordingly, the instant rejection disposition on a different premise is unlawful.

2) Although the expiration date of the land use period for the instant building was after the completion of the training under various Acts and subordinate statutes, it is unfair to assess the market price at around 37% of the newly built market price without reflecting the actual value. Since the re-financing cost method used to assess the value of the instant building is an unfair method for calculating the price premised on the new construction or creation of the instant building, the instant rejection disposition based on the amount assessed by such a method is unlawful. 3) Even if the ownership of the instant building was agreed to transfer the ownership of the instant building for domestic affairs, and the subsequent payment nature of the rent is attributable to the subsequent payment of the rent, the price for the supply of land rental services and other payments than money.

Since the value-added tax is applicable, the market value of the building of this case among the land-lease services supplied by the plaintiff for each taxable period of value-added tax should be the tax base of value-added tax, and the market value of the building of this case cannot be divided into the market value of the building of this case. In this regard, each part of the disposition of refusal of this case

(b) Related statutes;

It is as shown in the attached Form.

C. Determination

1) Whether the residual value of the instant building is the price for its residual value

In full view of the following facts, the Plaintiff agreed to acquire ownership of the instant building that is expected to possess a considerable value after the expiration of the land use period for the instant building (see the judgment below as to the result of appraisal) and the instant concession agreement only stipulates that the Plaintiff’s acquisition of ownership of the instant building and the lessee of the instant building may continue to use the instant building through consultation with the Plaintiff, in consultation with the Plaintiff, by comprehensively taking account of the following facts as revealed in the evidence Nos. 2 and 5 as a whole: