beta
Text
1. The main part of the lawsuit in this case shall be dismissed.
2. The plaintiff's conjunctive claim is dismissed.
3...
Reasons
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On December 9, 2011, the Plaintiff was a special purpose company established pursuant to Article 2 subparag. 5 of the Asset-Backed Securitization Act, and acquired, from the asset holder on December 29, 201, securitization assets in KRW 91.2 billion, including loans secured by Gyeonggi-si Building 506 Dong 1903 (hereinafter “instant real estate”).
B. In order to recover the above loan claims, the Plaintiff directly participated in the auction procedure of the instant real estate and won the instant real estate at the auction on June 18, 2012, and paid the sale price on November 2, 2012.
C. After that, the Plaintiff reported and paid to the Defendant acquisition tax, local education tax, and special rural development tax, calculated by deducting 50/100 from the tax base the acquisition value of the instant real estate as the tax base of KRW 305,000,000.
1) On July 4, 2013, the Defendant acquired the instant real estate by the former Restriction of Special Taxation Act (amended by Act No. 10406, Dec. 27, 2010; Act No. 11614, Jan. 1, 2013; hereinafter “new Act”); and the former Act before amended by Act No. 10406, Dec. 27, 2010;
(2) Since the acquisition of the instant real estate by the Defendant on July 10, 2013 is not subject to acquisition tax reduction and exemption under Article 120(1)9,509,920 won for the Plaintiff, local education tax of KRW 650,990, and special rural development tax of KRW 325,490, and special rural development tax of KRW 7,486,400 for each additional tax (including additional tax). However, since the acquisition of the instant real estate on July 10, 2013, the Defendant did not fall under those subject to acquisition tax reduction and exemption under Article 120(1)9 of the New Act, but falls under those subject to acquisition tax reduction and exemption under Article 40-2 of the former Restriction of Special Local Taxation Act (Amended by Act No. 11618, Jan. 1, 2013); thus, the special rural development tax of KRW 200 for the Plaintiff should be imposed under Article 5 of the Special Rural Development Tax Act.
(hereinafter referred to as “instant disposition”). [The grounds for recognition]