Whether the instant land constitutes land for which urban planning facilities have not been implemented for a long time

The Plaintiff purchased the instant land after completion of urban planning facility project and was able to establish a general medical facility on the ground of the instant land at any time according to its own will, but does not take any administrative procedure. Accordingly, it cannot be said that the ownership of the landowner is limited because only the determination and announcement of urban and Gun planning facilities is made. Thus, it does not constitute an unexecution land.

Article 6 of the Gross Real Estate Tax Act

2013Guhap17644 Such revocation as comprehensive real estate holding tax

○ ○ Private Teaching Institutes

OO Head of the tax office

on January 16, 2010

on October 27, 2014

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Cheong-gu Office

Of the imposition of comprehensive real estate holding tax for the year 2012 by the Defendant on November 21, 2012, the portion exceeding KRW 000 of comprehensive real estate holding tax for the year 2012, KRW 000, and KRW 000, total real estate holding tax for the year 200, and the portion exceeding KRW 000, out of total real estate holding tax for the special rural development tax, shall be revoked.

1. Details of the disposition;

(a) Housing site development business and acquisition of plaintiff's ownership;

1) On November 2, 1989, the Minister of Construction and Transportation designated and publicly notified the Construction Division No. 621 under Article 3(1) and Article 7 of the former Housing Site Development Promotion Act (amended by Act No. 5454, Dec. 13, 1997; hereinafter referred to as the “Housing Development Promotion Act”) as the housing site development area, and the Korea Land Corporation as the project implementer, respectively.

2) On January 10, 1994, the Governor of the Gyeonggi-do approved the implementation plan for the housing site development project for the above land implemented by the Korea Land Corporation under Article 1993-478 of the Housing Site Development Promotion Act (hereinafter referred to as the "project in this case") and publicly notified the topographic map, but on December 27, 1997, the Gyeonggi-do announced the change of the implementation plan by designating the planned area for the project in this case as the Gyeonggi-do announced under Article 1997-470 of the Housing Site Development Promotion Act and approved the change of the implementation plan and publicly notified the change of the topographic map

3) The instant land was designated and determined as “general medical facilities on the instant report on the determination of the urban planning (change) of the instant project, which was included in the foregoing notification and the modification notification, in Suwon-si OOdong-dong 961-11, 31,376 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”).

4) On March 6, 1998, the Minister of Construction and Transportation publicly announced the completion of the instant project under Article 11-2(2) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Housing Site Development Promotion Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 16395, Jun. 11, 1999; hereinafter referred to as the “Enforcement Decree of the Housing Site Development Promotion Act”) by the public announcement of the Ministry of Construction and Transportation under Article 198-93.

5) After completion of partition adjustment as to the instant land, the Korea Land Corporation completed each registration of ownership transfer on October 30, 1998 and December 26, 2003. The Plaintiff purchased the instant land from the Korea Land Corporation as a medical facility site and completed the registration of ownership transfer on January 10, 2008. The Plaintiff did not take administrative procedures, such as filing an application for permission for construction of a general medical facility after purchase of the instant land, and the instant land is the site.

(b) Imposition of comprehensive real estate holding tax.

1) On September 9, 201, the head of Suwon-si imposed the property tax of KRW 000 (total sum KRW 000, special taxation, special taxation) and local education tax of KRW 000 on the ground that the instant land does not constitute “land for which the topographical map has not been implemented for a long time for ten years or longer after the topographical map was publicly announced pursuant to Article 32 of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act, as urban planning facilities under Article 2 subparag. 7 of the former Restriction of Special Local Taxation Act (amended by Act No. 11618, Jan. 1, 2013; hereinafter “Special Local Taxation Restriction Act”).

2) The Defendant, based on the assessment data of property tax on the instant land of the head of Young-si, Suwon-si, divided the instant land into general aggregate taxation items as of June 1, 2012, which was the tax base date in June 2012, and calculated comprehensive real estate tax on the Plaintiff’s land, including the instant land, and deducted the property tax on the instant land after deducting the comprehensive real estate tax. On November 21, 2012, the Defendant decided and notified the Plaintiff on November 21, 2012, KRW 000 for comprehensive real estate holding tax for the year 2012, and KRW 000

3) The Plaintiff appealed and filed an appeal, but was dismissed by the Tax Tribunal on April 8, 2013.

[Ground of recognition] Gap evidence 1 to 5, Eul evidence 1 to 4, Gap evidence 6

of each film, the whole purport of the pleading, including the number of each

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

Since the instant land constitutes “land where an urban planning facility has not been executed for a long time after being determined and publicly announced as a general medical facility, which is an urban planning facility on January 10, 1994,” 50/100 of property tax should be reduced pursuant to Article 84(1) of the Restriction of Special Local Taxation Act, and comprehensive real estate tax and special rural development tax should be reduced on the premise that property tax on the instant land is reduced pursuant to Article 6 of the Comprehensive Real Estate Holding Tax Act and Article 5 of the Act on Special Rural Development.

B. Relevant statutes

Attached Form. The entry in the relevant statutes is as follows.

C. Determination

1) Article 84(1) of the Restriction of Special Local Taxation Act provides that property tax shall be reduced by 50/10 for land on which urban planning facilities under subparagraph 7 of Article 2 of the former National Land Planning and Utilization Act (amended by Act No. 11690, Mar. 23, 2013; hereinafter “National Land Planning Act”) have not been implemented for a long period of not less than ten years after the topographical map was publicly announced pursuant to Article 32 of the same Act, and Article 6(1) of the Restriction of Special Local Taxation Act provides that property tax shall be reduced by 50/10 for land on which private rights shall be exempted, and Article 6(1) of the Comprehensive Real Estate Holding Tax Act provides that the provisions on non-taxation, exemption from taxation, or reduction of property tax under the Restriction of Special Local Taxation Act shall apply mutatis mutandis

On the other hand, the National Land Planning and Utilization Act provides that the head of a Si/Gun shall prepare and publicly announce a topographical map when a decision on an urban/Gun management plan is publicly announced pursuant to Article 30 (Article 32 (1) and that where an urban/Gun planning facility project concerning the installation of an urban/Gun planning facility is not implemented until 20 years have passed from the date of public announcement of the decision on an urban/Gun planning facility, the decision on an urban/Gun planning facility project shall lose its effect on the day following the 20th anniversary of the date of public announcement (Article 48 (1)).

On the other hand, Article 84 (1) of the Restriction of Special Local Taxation Act provides that property tax shall be reduced or exempted in order to alleviate the burden on the land owner who is not able to use the land for the previous purposes due to the determination of urban planning facilities. In light of the provisions related to the invalidation of the determination of urban planning facilities under the National Land Planning and Utilization Act and the implementation of urban planning facilities, "unexecution during the long-term period" under Article 84 (1) of the Restriction of Special Local Taxation Act refers to the state in which the ownership of the land owner is limited by the establishment of the phased execution plan under Article 85 of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act,

2) The former Housing Site Development Promotion Act (amended by Act No. 11690, Mar. 23, 2013); the designation authority shall, in order to designate a housing site development zone, establish a housing site development plan including a land use plan and a plan for installation of major infrastructure (Article 8); the implementer shall prepare an implementation plan for the housing site development project; the implementation plan shall include a Class 1 district unit plan and a plan for supply of housing sites (Article 9); the determination of an urban management plan under Article 30 of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act when the implementer prepares or obtains approval for the implementation plan; the permission for development activities under Article 56 of the same Act; the designation of the implementor of an urban planning facility project under Article 88 of the same Act; and the completion inspection or completion inspection of the relevant project under authorization and permission when the completion of the housing site development project is completed (Article 11(1)); and the implementation plan shall be deemed to have been completed (Article 16(1) and (2)); and the implementation plan shall be managed by the district (Article 16(3).

In other words, since the housing site development plan under the Housing Site Development Promotion Act constitutes an urban management plan under the National Land Planning Act, the housing site development project executor prepares the implementation plan based on the housing site development plan and receives the completion inspection after completion of the housing site development project, the project is completed

3) In this case, the Korea Land Corporation, the implementer of the housing site development project, obtained approval of the implementation plan for the housing site development project from the Governor of the Gyeonggi-do, and decided that the land in this case was an urban planning facility project in accordance with the implementation plan, and completed the completion inspection and announcement thereof after completion of the housing site development project, and it is reasonable to deem that the land in this case has already been completed the implementation of the urban planning facility project included in the housing site development project. The Plaintiff purchased the land in this case after completion of the urban planning facility project and does not take any administrative procedure even if it can be constructed at any time on the ground of the land in this case at any time according to its own intention, and it cannot be said

Therefore, we cannot accept the Plaintiff’s assertion premised on the premise that the instant land falls under “land on which an urban planning facility project for the installation of the relevant urban planning facility is not implemented,” such as authorization of an implementation plan for at least 10 years after the determination of an urban management plan for urban planning facilities.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

(c)