logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2016.12.23 2016구합69826
취득세등부과처분취소
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. From June 1, 2005, B engaged in advertising agency business under the trade name of Seongdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government 3rd floor 11 “A” (hereinafter “individual business”). On October 18, 2005, B established a plaintiff for the purpose of advertising business, advertising production, construction, and advertising agency business at the same place as of October 18, 2005 and became the representative director, and closed the above individual business on November 3, 2005.

On the other hand, the plaintiff was confirmed by the president of the Korea Technology Finance Corporation on September 26, 2008.

B. On June 25, 2010, the Plaintiff acquired a 379.85 square meters of the Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D, 193.4 square meters of land and its ground (the combination of the above land and buildings; hereinafter “the instant real estate”) in order to carry on the business, and the Plaintiff was exempted from acquisition tax and registration tax, etc. pursuant to Articles 119(3)1 and 120(3) of the former Restriction of Special Taxation Act (amended by Act No. 10406, Dec. 27, 2010) that the small and medium start-up venture enterprise acquires within four years from the start-up date of business (the date it is confirmed as a venture business).

C. However, on September 10, 2014, the Defendant imposed acquisition tax on the Plaintiff and its registration amounting to KRW 61,803,100, special rural development tax, KRW 6,180,290, KRW 186,798,70, KRW 34,86,70, KRW 2,474, and KRW 860, and KRW 2,474,860, and KRW 860, respectively, on the acquisition and registration thereof, on the ground that the establishment of the Plaintiff by B constitutes “a case where a new corporation is established by converting a business run by a resident into a corporation” under Article 6(4)2 of the former Restriction of Special Taxation Act (amended by Act No. 9272, Dec. 26, 2008).

(hereinafter collectively referred to as “instant disposition”). D.

On December 10, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal on the instant disposition. However, on May 16, 2016, the Plaintiff was served with a ruling dismissing the said claim by the Tax Tribunal.

[Ground of recognition] There is no dispute.

arrow