Suwon District Court 201Guhap10257 ( October 17, 2012)

early 2011 Middle 0917 (201.05.04)

Land shall not be subject to reduction or exemption by transferring it for more than three years from the date of incorporation into a residential area;

Transfer land is not subject to reduction or exemption of capital gains tax because it cannot be viewed as an inevitable reason for exclusion from reduction or exemption because it has been transferred for more than three years after being incorporated into a residential area before the execution of the development project, and it is not subject to reduction or exemption of capital gains tax.

2012Nu8702 Transfer Income Tax Imposition Center

KimAAA et al.

Head of Sungnam Tax Office et al.

Suwon District Court Decision 201Guhap10257 Decided February 17, 2012

March 22, 2013

April 12, 2013

The plaintiffs' appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked. The imposition of the capital gains tax of 000 won (including additional tax of 000 won) accrued in 2009 against the Plaintiff KimA on December 1, 2010 by the head of the Sungnam Tax Office and the imposition of the capital gains tax of 000 won (including additional tax of 000 won) accrued in 2009 against the Plaintiff KimB on December 15, 2010 shall be revoked.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasons why the court should explain this case are as follows, and the 7th to 8th 19 is as follows, and the 7th 17th 7th 8th 7th 8th 7th 8th 7th 7th 7th 7th 7th 19th 2th 19th 7th 2th 2th 19th 7th 2th 19th 7th 2th 2th 2th 2th 2th 3th 8th 2th 200 of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Parts to be corrected;

A. In light of the principle of no taxation without the law, the interpretation of tax laws and regulations shall be interpreted as the legal text, barring any special circumstance, and it shall not be extensively interpreted or analogically interpreted without any justifiable reason, and in particular, it is also consistent with the principle of fair taxation (see Supreme Court Decision 2008Du11372, Aug. 20, 2009). The determination of each of the instant land is based on the above legal principles, and the assertion that each of the instant land was incorporated into the residential area of June 27, 2005, before the development project is implemented, and then three years later since it was incorporated into the residential area of January 16, 2009 (the first land of this case) and February 20, 2009 (the second land of this case) and that the land was not incorporated into the residential area, and thus, the first land of this case does not meet the requirements of tax reduction and exemption under Article 6(1)6(1)4 of the Enforcement Decree of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act.

B. The proviso of Article 69(1) of the former Restriction of Special Taxation Act provides for a tax amount to be reduced or exempted in cases where farmland incorporated in a residential area satisfies the requirements for reduction or exemption under the main sentence of Article 69(1) of the former Restriction of Special Taxation Act. However, as seen earlier, each of the instant land does not meet the requirements for reduction or exemption under Article 69(1) of the former Restriction of Special Taxation Act, and thus, the above proviso on reduction

3. Conclusion

Then, the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed due to the lack of reason, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the plaintiffs' appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.