The purpose of legislation of collection of exempted tax amount under Article 18 (5) 1 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act, and in the case of delay not attributable to the taxpayer, the additional collection

In a case where capital gains tax has been exempted pursuant to Article 6 (2) 2 of the former Income Tax Act by first transferring the land and buildings of the former factory for the purpose of transferring the factory that has been continuously operated for more than 2 years, even if construction or completion of construction of a factory to be newly built after the grace period under Article 18 (5) 1 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 12877 of Dec. 30, 1989) which provides for the additional collection of the exempted tax amount was commenced, the purpose of the additional collection is to prevent the benefits of income tax reduction and exemption from being abused for non-productive purposes such as real estate speculation, and thereby, it is prescribed in the post management in order to examine the essence of income tax reduction and exemption from income tax reduction and exemption from the perspective of post management to prevent the benefits of income tax reduction and exemption from being abused for non-productive purposes. Thus, if the cause of the delay is attributable to the taxpayer for reasons not attributable to him, the capital

Article 6 (2) 2 of the former Income Tax Act, Article 18 (5) 1 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act

Supreme Court Decision 88Nu4553 decided Jun. 13, 1989 (Gong1989,1085) 89Nu6198 decided Jan. 12, 1990 (Gong1990,475) 91Nu8487 decided Apr. 28, 1992 (Gong192,1754)

[Defendant-Appellee] Plaintiff 1 et al.

Head of Western Tax Office

Seoul High Court Decision 93Gu9653 delivered on February 16, 1994

The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

Where the transfer income tax is exempted pursuant to Article 6 (2) 2 of the Income Tax Act (amended by Act No. 4163 of Dec. 30, 1989) by first transferring the land and building of the former factory for the purpose of transferring the factory continuously operated for a period of two years or more, even if the construction or construction of the factory to be newly constructed after the grace period under Article 18 (5) 1 of the Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 12877 of Dec. 30, 1989) which provides for the additional collection of the exempted tax amount was commenced, the purpose of the additional collection is to prevent the benefits of the reduction or exemption of income tax from abusing the benefits of the income tax for non-productive purposes such as real estate speculation, and it is provided in the follow-up management that seeks to examine the meaning of the reduction or exemption of income tax (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 91Nu8487, Apr. 28, 199; 89Nu618185, etc.

In full view of the facts duly admitted by the court below, the decision of the court below that the plaintiff can regard the commencement of civil engineering works for the development of the Songcheon-si Industrial Complex by the Samcheon-si market as the construction of the factory to be newly constructed in that place is acceptable, and even if the actual commencement date was one year after the transfer date of the previous factory, as alleged by the plaintiff, in light of the facts acknowledged by the court below, the cause is not attributable to the plaintiff's negligence, and this point does not affect its conclusion.

In addition, it is alleged that the factory is completed and operated only after the elapse of several months after the completion of the construction of the wastewater treatment facility, which is a premise for the plaintiff's newly built factory. However, even if the facts alleged by the court below are somewhat inappropriate as pointed out in the judgment process of the court below, the conclusion that the construction of the new factory is not completed within two years from the date of construction of the new factory, and it cannot be subject to additional collection because there are justifiable grounds for not extending the period.

The court below's decision is clear that it has cited only the purpose of legislation of capital gains tax collection in the above 91Nu8487 decision of April 28, 192, and it does not have determined the case identical to this case. The theory of lawsuit is merely a misunderstanding of the purport of admitting the court below.

There is no reason or reason to discuss.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed and all costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Lee Don-hee (Presiding Justice)