logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2017.05.18 2016구합51614
양도소득세부과처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiffs' claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Mayor of Incheon Metropolitan City, from March 2005 to July 2, 2005, specially supplied the land for living measures located in the Yeonsu-gu Incheon Metropolitan City E, F, G, H, etc. (a person per capita) for a long-term installment trading for 10 years, and allowed the purchaser to change the purchaser’s name only once before full payment due to special terms and conditions.

B. According to the above special agreement, the plaintiffs succeeded to the rights and obligations with respect to each land for daily countermeasures that were supplied to them from April 2005 to December 2006, and completed the registration of ownership transfer.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant land”) each site for living countermeasures against which the succession of rights and duties and the transfer of ownership have been made by each Plaintiff.

From April 6, 2015 to May 13, 2015, the Defendants respectively decided and notified the Plaintiffs of the transfer income tax for 2007, as stated in the “the first capital gains tax amount” column in the attached Form 2 against each joint building association to which they belong.

On November 25, 2015, the Plaintiffs appealed to the Tax Tribunal, and the Tax Tribunal rendered a decision to partially accept the transfer margin of the instant land: “The acquisition date shall be the date of receipt of ownership transfer registration of the instant land; and the acquisition value shall be determined by the Plaintiff after confirming the specific transaction details, such as the time of acquisition of the instant land by the Plaintiff, and examining the actual transaction value, transaction example, appraisal value, etc. pursuant to Articles 96 and 114 of the Income Tax Act and Article 176-2 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, and applying them in order to correct the tax base and the tax amount according to

E. Accordingly, the Defendants, from December 30, 2015 to March 31, 2016, with respect to the Plaintiffs, as indicated in the “amount of capital gains tax corrected” column in the attached Table 2, as stated in the “amount of capital gains tax corrected.”

arrow