Whether income based on a private invalid sales contract is included in the tax revenue under tax law

Revenue based on a contract of sale and purchase in force under private law as well as revenue based on a contract of sale and purchase in private law shall be included in tax revenue.

Article 4 of the Income Tax Act

Supreme Court Decision 64Da925 Delivered on December 22, 1964

Plaintiff

Head of Sungbuk Tax Office

Seoul High Court Decision 78Gu397 delivered on May 9, 1979

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

As to the Grounds of Appeal:

(1) The court below rejected the Plaintiff’s preliminary claim on the ground that it is reasonable to interpret that the Plaintiff’s purchase and sale of the instant land were included in the tax revenue under the tax law as including (1) the Plaintiff’s primary claim by considering the following circumstances: (2) the Plaintiff’s purchase and sale of the instant land in order to compensate for the Plaintiff’s loss caused by the profit margin on the instant land; (3) the Plaintiff’s act of selling the instant land as a real estate sales business; and (4) the Plaintiff’s primary claim was rejected by deeming the Plaintiff’

In light of the records, all of the above measures of the court below are just, and there is no error of law such as misunderstanding of legal principles as to the purpose of profit-making by law, misunderstanding of legal principles as to the business under Article 1 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Business Tax Act and the real estate business under Article 11 subparagraph 1 of the same Decree, misunderstanding of legal principles as to the river area under Article 2 (1) 2(c) of the River Act, and omission of judgment.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Justices Ahn Byung-soo (Presiding Justice)