Suwon District Court 201Guhap5903 ( October 16, 2012)

National Tax Service Review and Transfer 2010-0322 ( October 25, 2011)

Since it is merely a simple exchange and cannot confirm the actual transfer value, the calculation of transfer margin is legitimate based on the standard market price.

(The same as the judgment of the first instance court) It is merely a simple exchange in light of the details and contents of the conclusion of an exchange contract and thus it is impossible to confirm the actual transfer value. Since there is no transaction example or no adequate appraisal value, the transfer value shall not be based on the standard market price, and in this case, the acquisition value shall also be based on the

2012Nu29389 Revocation of Disposition of Imposing capital gains tax

LAA

Head of Sungnam Tax Office

Suwon District Court Decision 201Guhap5903 Decided August 16, 2012

May 1, 2013

May 29, 2013

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The judgment of the first instance is revoked. The transfer income tax reverted to the Plaintiff on August 10, 2010 that the Defendant rendered to the Plaintiff on August 10, 2010.

The imposition of KRW 000 shall be revoked.

1. cite the judgment of the first instance;

The reasons for this court's ruling are as follows. This court's ruling is based on Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

o 5 pages 5, "Therefore, this case's disposition, which calculated capital gains by estimation, shall not be deemed to be in violation of the principle of no taxation without law."

o The following shall be added to five pages 6:

In addition, the Plaintiff asserts that the acquisition value may be calculated as the appraised value at the first instance court on the premise that it is reasonable to view the appraised value at the market price in light of the Supreme Court precedents, etc. that the appraisal value of a reliable appraisal institution may be deemed as the market price, and that the acquisition value may be calculated as the appraised value and the transfer margin may be calculated. However, in the calculation of the transfer margin, the actual transaction value, which is the basis for the calculation of the transfer margin, refers to the actual transaction price, not the general market price that reflects the objective exchange value, but the actual agreed amount as the price for the transaction itself or at the time of the transaction (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Du7171, Apr. 26, 2007) and the following various circumstances (see, e.g., Supreme Court

2. Conclusion

The judgment of the first instance is justifiable. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.