logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2018.05.25 2017구합22161
지방세 감면청구 거부처분 취소
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. As a non-profit medical corporation established on October 29, 2012, the Plaintiff is engaging in the establishment and operation of medical institutions, making a tour of local residents' old age and free villages, research and development on health and medical services, and other incidental projects necessary for accomplishing its objectives.

The Plaintiff is establishing and operating C/C hospital (hereinafter referred to as “C hospital”) in North-gu, North-si, North-si.

B. On September 23, 2016, the Plaintiff newly constructed a multi-family house with three floors of reinforced concrete (refinite) roof (refinite size, total floor area of 876 square meters, 649.68 square meters; hereinafter “instant building”) on the north-gu, Northern-gu, Mapo-si, Mapo-si, Mapo-si, and F, and registered the preservation of ownership on September 23, 2016.

C. On September 22, 2016, the Plaintiff determined the tax base of KRW 835,082,147, which is the acquisition value of the building of this case, to the Defendant, and determined the acquisition tax of KRW 23,382,30 calculated by multiplying the said tax rate by 2.8% (i.e., KRW 835,082,147 x 28 x 1000 x 6,680,650 (=835,082,147 x 8 ± 800 x 835,082,147 x 800) calculated by applying the tax rate of KRW 28/100 to the acquisition tax rate of KRW 20/100 less the acquisition tax rate of KRW 20/100 (Article 151(1)1 of the Local Tax Act) and calculated by multiplying the said tax rate by 20%, 31,36134,47

그런데 원고는 2016. 12. 7. 피고에게 이 사건 건물이 구 지방세특례제한법(2016. 12. 27. 법률 제17781호로 개정되기 전의 것, 이하 같다) 제38조 제1항에서 정한 ‘의료법인이 의료업에 직접 사용하기 위하여 취득한 부동산’에 해당한다는 이유로 원고가 납부한 위 취득세 및 지방교육세 합계 24,718,430원 중 75/100에 해당하는 18,538,820원(≒24,718,430원 × 75 ÷ 100, 단 십원 미만 버림)을 경감ㆍ환급해달라며 경정청구를 하였다. 라.

On December 20, 2016, the Defendant rejected the Plaintiff’s application for rectification for the following reasons:

hereinafter referred to as "the case."

arrow