logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2017. 01. 25. 선고 2016두55889 판결
이 사건 부동산의 소유권이전원인이 매매 또는 대물변인지, 교환인지 여부[국승]
Case Number of the immediately preceding lawsuit

Seoul High Court 2016Nu34778 (Law No. 21, 2016.09)

Case Number of the previous trial

Examination 2014-0023 (O4.27)

Title

Whether the reason for the ownership transfer of the real estate in this case is whether it is a sale or substitute, or an exchange.

Summary

Examining the developments leading up to the preparation of an exchange contract and the transfer of ownership on the instant real estate, the instant real estate was transferred by the exchange, and since no market price appraisal was made on the instant real estate, the sale price of the instant real estate is unclear.

Related statutes

Article 96 of the Income Tax Act

Cases

Supreme Court Decision 2016Du5589 ( October 25, 2017)

Plaintiff-Appellant

Park* Dong-dong et al.1

Defendant-Appellee

****The Director of the Tax Office

Judgment of the lower court

Seoul High Court Decision 2016Nu34778 Decided September 21, 2016

Imposition of Judgment

201.01.25

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

Reasons

Examining the lower judgment and the grounds of appeal, the grounds of appeal by appellant are not included in the grounds of appeal under each subparagraph of Article 4(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure for Appeal, or are deemed to fall under each subparagraph of paragraph (3). Therefore, the appeal is dismissed under Article 5 of the same Act. It is so decided as per

arrow