logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2018.08.14 2017구합70459
양도소득세부과처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On April 12, 2002, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer of a house listed in [Attachment 1] Paragraph (1) of [Attachment 1], and completed the registration of ownership transfer to B (hereinafter “B”) on February 10, 2014 for sale on the same day.

B. Meanwhile, on November 26, 1986, the Plaintiff’s spouse acquired the ownership of a house listed in attached Table 1 List 2 (hereinafter “non-contentious house”). On April 11, 2014, the Plaintiff’s spouse sold to D, his/her child, KRW 2 billion, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of this on April 23, 2014.

C. On June 5, 2014, C reported and paid the transfer income tax of KRW 103,866,547 by applying the special deduction for long-term possession of one house per household with respect to the transfer margin exceeding KRW 900 million in relation to the transfer of housing other than the issues.

C died on August 23, 2014, and the Plaintiff and D inherited C’s property.

E. On March 7, 2017, the Defendant issued a disposition imposing KRW 904,640,240,000, total of KRW 158,632,092, total of KRW 904,640,240,240, on March 7, 2017, on the following grounds: (a) the instant house was first owned by the Plaintiff; and (b) C owned two houses with two houses for one household; (c) even if C used the special deduction for long-term possession of one house for one household; and (d) the Defendant unlawfully under-reported and paid capital gains tax by applying the special deduction for long-term possession of one house for one household.

(f) The Plaintiff filed an appeal against the instant disposition, and the Tax Tribunal dismissed the appeal on August 8, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion-based owner was B from the time of new construction, but the Plaintiff received a title trust upon completing the registration of ownership transfer on April 12, 2002, and returned the registration of ownership transfer to B on February 10, 2014.

arrow