logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2020.06.11 2018구합22730
재산세등부과처분취소
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. The Plaintiff is a juristic person that establishes and operates a membership golf course (hereinafter “instant golf course”) in Yangsan-si, Yangsan-si.

B. Article 111(1)1(c)2 of the former Local Tax Act (amended by Act No. 16855, Dec. 31, 2019) (hereinafter “instant issues clause”) shall be classified as land for membership golf course among the instant golf course sites as land subject to separate taxation.

(1) The Plaintiff imposed the Plaintiff property tax (land) on a regular period of 2017 and the local education tax amounting to KRW 373,362,400 on September 7, 2017 (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

(c) The Defendant filed an objection on December 5, 2017, but received a decision of dismissal on December 22, 2017, and filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal on February 12, 2018, but received a decision of dismissal on April 19, 2018. [In the absence of any dispute over the grounds for recognition, Party A’s evidence 1-3, Party A’s evidence 2-3, and Party A’s evidence 3-3, the purport of the entire pleadings, and the purport of the entire pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The key issue clause of this case, which provides for the Plaintiff’s claim membership golf course tax rate, is unconstitutional for the following reasons, and the disposition of this case, which applied the unconstitutional law, should be revoked as unlawful.

1) A violation of the principle of excessive prohibition) The key issues of the instant case were enacted in 1973, and today’s current situation were significantly different, and golf cannot be recognized as a private sports. Moreover, the Installation and Utilization of Sports Facilities Act stipulates golf as sports for which the State and the local government should provide guidance and support.

Therefore, the key issues of this case lost the legitimacy of the purpose itself.

In addition, the entities with outstanding capacity or the entities that consume private goods are not the operators of membership golf courses.

arrow