In case where one household owns one house on a certain site and resides in another house and reconstructs one house, the method of calculating the residential period for recognizing one house for one household as one house.

The provisions of Article 5 subparagraph 6 (i) of the Income Tax Act and Article 15 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 13194, Dec. 31, 1990) shall be added to the period of residence of new and old houses in calculating the period of residence, and therefore, Article 15 (11) of the Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 13194, Dec. 31, 1990) of the Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 13194, Dec. 31, 1990) shall be a rule confirming the above legal reasoning, and the conclusion shall not be different solely on the fact that the total floor area of new house is close twice the total floor area of the old house.

Article 5 subparagraph 6 (i) of the Income Tax Act, Article 15 (11) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 13194 of Dec. 31, 1990), Article 15 (1) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 13194 of Dec. 31, 1990)

[Plaintiff-Appellant] Plaintiff 1 and 1 other (Law Firm Domin, Attorney Park Jae-soo and 1 other, Counsel for plaintiff-appellant-appellant-appellant-appellant-appellant-appellant-Appellee)

Plaintiff

head of Dongjak-gu Tax Office

Seoul High Court Decision 92Gu28633 delivered on April 1, 1993

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

1. According to the reasoning of the court below, the plaintiff acquired 159 square meters of 159 square meters of 30 December 30, 197, the plaintiff acquired 19 square meters of 159 square meters of 2nd on the ground of 1977, and owned 2nd on the ground of 1978, and it was difficult for the plaintiff to live as it was after her old house on the ground of 1987, and transferred 14 May 14, 1990 of 199 when she was constructing 2nd house on the ground of 190 and owned 2nd house on the ground of 197, and the plaintiff transferred 190 square meters of 19 square meters of 159 square meters of 159 square meters of 197, from November 25, 197 to July 14, 1980; and there was no error in the court below's finding of facts from the date of misunderstanding of facts among 10th to July 19, 1987.

2. Article 5 subparag. 6 (i) of the Income Tax Act and Article 15 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 13194, Dec. 31, 1990); the legislative intent of non-taxation on capital gains tax is not to temporarily reside in one household for a long period of time, but to transfer the house to another place for the purpose of acquiring capital gains tax or speculation, and to ensure that it is naturally the people's freedom to move the house, and that it does not intend to acquire capital gains tax, and that if the old house has been owned by one household and resided on a certain site for a considerable period of time, it is too worn out, and new house has been reconstructed at that place, it should be added to the total floor area of the new house and new house in calculating the dwelling period under the above Act; therefore, it should be determined differently by Presidential Decree No. 15 (11) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Nu29789, Dec. 29, 197, 297).

In the same purport, the judgment of the court below that the disposition of this case imposed on the plaintiff was unlawful because the resident period of the new house did not meet the non-taxation requirement of one household, is justified, and there is no error of law in the misapprehension of legal principles pointing out the theory of lawsuit.

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 Chocheon-sung (Presiding Justice)