logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 1981. 11. 5. 선고 81구105 판결
[양도소득세부과처분취소][판례집불게재]
Plaintiff

Lee & Lee (Attorney Kim-hee et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

Defendant

Head of Mapo Tax Office

Conclusion of Pleadings

October 15, 1981

Text

Of the imposition of capital gains tax of KRW 14,437,49 and tax of KRW 8,228,718 on May 6, 1980 and the imposition of capital gains tax of KRW 4,436,249 and defense tax of KRW 2,894,718 on May 6, 1980, the part in excess of KRW 2,894,718 shall be revoked.

The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.

The lawsuit costs shall be divided into three parts, and two parts shall be borne by the plaintiff and the remainder by the defendant.

Purport of claim

The disposition imposed by the Defendant on the Plaintiff on May 6, 1980 KRW 14,437,499 and KRW 8,228,718 of the defense tax shall be revoked.

The judgment that the lawsuit costs shall be borne by the defendant.

Reasons

피고가 1980.5.6. 원고에게 1980년도 수시분 양도소득세 금 14,437,499원 및 방위세 금 8,228,718원을 각 부과처분한 사실은 당사자 사이에 다툼이 없고, 성립에 다툼이 없는 갑제7호증의 1,2(각 등기부등본), 을제1호증(결정결의서), 을제2호증(과세자료이송), 을제3호증(세무자료통보), 을제5호증의 1(계산서) 같은 소증의 2(영수증), 같은호증의 3(계산명세서), 같은호증의 4(산출계산), 을제6호증의 1(감면신청서), 같은호증의 2(매매계약서)의 각 기재내용에 변론의 전취지를 종합하면, 원고는 1978.9.14. 서울 영등포구 여의도동 1의 653 대 145평, 같은번지의 665 대 122평, 도합 대지 267평에 대한 2분의 1 지분을 금 45,000,000원에 매수하여 같은해 11.30 위 각 대지에 관하여 원고명의로 각 지분 소유권이전등기를 경료하였다가 1979.5.17 및 5.19에 소외 라이프주택개발 주식회사에게 금 160,200,000원에 매도하고 그 소유권이전등기를 경유한 사실, 원고는 이상과 같이 위 각 대지를 매수하였다가 양도하여 부동산 양도소득이 발생하였다고 하여 피고에게 1979.7.경 자산양도차익 예정신고를 함에 있어서, 위 대지를 위 각 일시에 금 1억원에 매수하였다가 금 160,200,000원에 매도하고 필요경비등으로 합계 금 3,935,000원을 지출하여 금 56,265,000원의 양도차익이 있었고, 이건대지를 취득한 위 소외 회사는 주택건설촉진법 제21조 의 아파트지구 개발사업 시행자이므로 조세감면규제법 제3조의3 제5항 에 의하여 62.6퍼센트의 양도소득세액 감면을 받을 수 있으므로 위 감면액 금 35,165,629원을 차감한 양도소득 금 21,099,371원을 예정결정 과세표준액으로 하여, 위 금액에 소정의 세율(70퍼센트)를 곱하여 세액을 금 14,769,563원으로 산정하여 양도착익 예정신고를 하고, 예정신고납부세액 공제금 1,476,956원을 공제한 금 13,292,607원을 자진납부한 사실, 이에 피고는 원고의 위 예정신고 사항중 필요경비를 일부 감액수정하여 이건대지에 대한 양도소득 세액을 금 15,452,063원으로 결정하고, 원고가 기납부한 세액 금 13,292,607원 및 예정신고납부세액공제 금 1,476,956원을 각 차감하여 고지세액으로 금 682,500원 및 이에대한 방위세로 금 327,600원으로 각 결정하여 납부케한 사실, 그후 피고는 내무부 치안본부장으로부터 원고가 위 양도차익중 일부를 탈루시켰다는 통보를 받고 같은해 5.6 원고의 위 대지지분 취득가액을 금 45,000,000원으로 인정하고, 위 필요경비 금 1,335,000원을 공제하여 양도차액을 금 113,865,000원으로 경정한후 위 금액에서 위 양도소득 감면율에 의한 감면액 금 71,165,625원(113,865,000원 × 62.5/100)을 공제하여 과세표준액을 금 42,699,375원(113,865,000원 - 71,165,625원)으로 하고, 소정의 세율(70퍼센트)를 곱하여 산출세액으로 금 29,889,562원을 산출한후 위 금액에서 예정신고 납부세액공제 금 1,476,956원, 기납부세액 금 13,292,607원을 각 공제하고 다시 앞에서본 당초 결정시의 고지세액 금 682,500원을 공제하여 양도소득세로 금 14,437,499원 및 이에대한 방위세로 금 8,228,718원을 각 부과하는 경정결정을 하여 이사건 과세처분을 한 사실을 각 인정할 수 있고 달리 반증없다.

The plaintiff's transfer registration of the above-mentioned land is not for the purpose of acquiring ownership, but merely for securing the plaintiff's claim against the non-party 1's non-party 6's non-party 1's non-party 6's non-party 6's non-party 1's non-party 6's non-party 6's non-party 1's non-party 6's non-party 6's non-party 1's non-party 6's non-party 6's non-party 6's non-party 1's non-party 6's non-party 6's non-party 1's non-party 6's non-party 6's non-party 1's non-party 6's non-party 1's non-party 6's non-party 6's non-party 1's non-party 6's non-party 1's non-party 6's non-party 1's non-party 6's non-party 1's counter-6'

As long as it is difficult to newly construct and sell a commercial building as above, 9.14 of the same year and 0.14 of the above 200 million won for the above 20 billion won for the above 20-year transfer income tax (the above 200-year transfer income tax rate shall be 10 billion won for the above 40-year transfer income tax) and the above 10-year transfer income tax rate shall be 200 million won since the above 20-year transfer income tax was invested by the plaintiff, etc. as the other party, and the above 40-year transfer income tax (the above 40-year transfer income tax rate shall be 100 million won for the above 20-year transfer income tax, and the above 40-year transfer income tax shall be deducted from the above 1-65 and 653-year transfer income tax for the above 10-year transfer income tax and the above 9-year transfer income tax shall be deducted from the above 10-year transfer income tax by the plaintiff, etc.

Therefore, as seen earlier, the Plaintiff, as seen above, purchased 1/2 of the site of this case on September 14, 1978, 1978. 45,00 won (90,000 won x 1/2) as the Plaintiff paid 38,100,000 won (76,200,000 x 1/2) out of the proceeds of sale x 1/2). As the Plaintiff paid 1/2 of the above high-level creditors, the acquisition value of 360,100,00 won (45,000,000 won + 38,000,000 won (30,000,000 won) - 36,00,000 won (30,000,000 won) out of the proceeds of sale - 5,00 won (30,000,000 won) out of the above proceeds of sale -38,1030,5000.

However, the Plaintiff already paid the amount of KRW 13,292,607, and paid the amount of KRW 682,500 at the time of the initial decision, which eventually amounts to KRW 4,436,249.

The following defense tax base amount for the transfer income of this case is 51,58,544 U.S. (Article 98 of the Income Tax Act) calculated by subtracting 1,476,956 won from the calculated tax amount of KRW 53,035,50 ( KRW 75,765,000 x 70/100 x 70/100) of the above transfer margin, and 10,311,708 won calculated by multiplying the above amount by the specified tax rate (20%). The tax base amount for the transfer income of this case is 7,089,390 won, and 327,60 won after deducting 1,476,956 won from the calculated tax amount of the above transfer margin x 70/100.

Therefore, since the part of the disposition that the Defendant imposed capital gains tax of KRW 14,437,49 and the defense tax of KRW 8,228,718 on the Plaintiff in 1980 exceeds KRW 4,436,249 and the defense tax of KRW 2,894,718 on the Plaintiff is unlawful, the Plaintiff’s claim for revocation is accepted within the above recognized limit, and the remainder is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition by the application of Article 14 of the Administrative Litigation Act and Articles 89, and 92 of the Civil Procedure Act with respect to the bearing of litigation costs.

November 5, 1981

Judges Park Jong-chul(Presiding Judge)

arrow