Early High Court Decision 2009Du0579 ( October 24, 2009)

(Trial Disorder) The rejection disposition of comprehensive real estate holding tax, etc. on forest preserved in its original form is legitimate.

(Summary) The Comprehensive Real Estate Tax Act itself is not unconstitutional, but does not violate the principle of no taxation without law and the principle of no comprehensive delegation prohibition, and does not infringe on the freedom of equality and occupation choice under the Constitution, and it cannot be deemed that there is discrimination against forest land for a membership golf course located in the Seoul Metropolitan Area without reasonable grounds.

2011Du21546 Revocation of revocation of a revocation of comprehensive real estate holding tax, etc.

State AAA of a New Company

The director of the tax office

Seoul High Court Decision 2011Nu8026 Decided August 17, 2011

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

While examining the grounds of appeal in comparison with the records of this case and the judgment of the court below, the argument on the grounds of appeal is deemed not to include or not acceptable the grounds stipulated in each subparagraph of Article 4(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure for Appeal. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed and it is so decided as per Disposition

Reference materials.

If the grounds of final appeal are not included in the grounds of final appeal that make it appropriate for the court of final appeal to become a legal trial, such as matters concerning significant violation of Acts and subordinate statutes, etc., the system of trial without continuing the deliberation on the merits of the grounds of final appeal, and refers to the system of dismissal of final appeal by judgment without continuing the deliberation on the merits of the grounds of final appeal (see this case, e.g.,