early 201J 3359 ( October 23, 2012)

The acquisition value under the contract submitted by the real estate purchaser is recognized as the actual transaction amount.

In full view of the fact that the purchaser’s statement on the payment method and source of the purchase price, the details of the preparation of the sales contract, etc. is very specific and objective, and that the motive for the preparation of the sales contract was expected to have increased, the acquisition value in the contract submitted by the purchaser is recognized as the actual transaction amount.

2012Gu 932 Revocation of Disposition of Imposing capital gains tax

LAA

The director of the Southern Incheon District Office

December 18, 2012

January 15, 2013

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

The Defendant’s disposition of imposition of capital gains tax of 000 won for the year 2002 against the Plaintiff on September 1, 201 shall be revoked.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On October 12, 2001, the Plaintiff acquired 00 OO apartment 00,000 OO apartment 00,000 (hereinafter “instant housing”) in Gyeyang-gu Incheon, Gyeyang-gu, Incheon, and transferred it to ParkCC on June 10, 2002, and reported the transfer income tax for the year 2002, the Plaintiff reported the acquisition value of the instant housing at KRW 00 and the transfer value at KRW 000.

B. However, on October 29, 2004, ParkCC reported the acquisition value of the instant housing as KRW 000 when transferring the instant housing to the PP and reporting the transfer income tax.

C. On September 1, 201, the Defendant issued the instant disposition imposing KRW 000,00, including penalty tax, on the ground that the transfer value of the instant house was KRW 000,000, and that the transfer value was actually reported as KRW 000.

D. The Plaintiff appealed and filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal on September 21, 201, but April 2012.

23. was dismissed.

[Reasons for Recognition] The non-sured facts, Gap evidence 2, 4, and 6 through 8 (including several numbers), and Eul evidence 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The parties' assertion

1) The plaintiff's assertion

The Plaintiff transferred the instant house to ParkCC at KRW 000. The Plaintiff’s statement in a sales contract (No. 1) submitted by the Plaintiff at the time of filing a transfer income tax and the statement of a licensed real estate agent ParkF is consistent with this. Therefore, the instant disposition that deemed the transfer value of the instant house as KRW 000 is unlawful.

2) The defendant's assertion

The Plaintiff transferred the instant house to ParkCC at KRW 000. The entry of the sales contract (Evidence A No. 3) submitted by ParkCC at the time of reporting the transfer income tax following the transfer of the instant house, and the statement of YG et al. and 2 other than ParkF, working together with ParkF, are consistent with this, and ParkCC and its wife KimH have made a very detailed statement about the situation at the time of concluding the instant housing sales contract and the source and payment method of the sales amount, and their statements are consistent with objective facts. Accordingly, the instant disposition is lawful.

B. Relevant statutes

It is as shown in the attached Form.

C. Determination

A) The housing of this case is indicated as follows: “A” No. 1, the sales contract under the name of the Plaintiff, “A”, and “A”, the sales price of KRW 000, the down payment of KRW 000, the intermediate payment of KRW 000, May 31, 2002, the remainder payment of KRW 00 in June 20, 2002, and the Plaintiff, the buyer, and the broker, and Park FF, respectively. The housing sales contract of this case is signed by the Plaintiff, and the housing sales price of the instant case is 00 won, and the housing sales price of the instant case is 00 won, and the housing sales price of the Plaintiff was prepared at the time of entering into the actual sales contract, and the housing price of the instant case is written at the time of entering into the real sales contract, and the housing price of the Plaintiff is written at the time of entering into the first transaction with GG, the first transaction with which the real real estate brokerage business was conducted, and the housing price of H or H.

B) On the other hand, each of the evidence mentioned above, Gap evidence, Eul evidence Nos. 3, 11, and 12 (including family parcel number), Eul evidence Nos. 5, and Eul evidence Nos. 6, witness regularG, Kim H, and ParkCC's testimony is acknowledged as follows if the whole purport of the pleading is added.

O) The Plaintiff’s housing of this case and Party A, the sales contract under the name of the Plaintiff and Park Ha Kim H, and Party B, the sales price of KRW 000, the down payment of KRW 000, and the remainder 00 shall be paid and received in June 20, 2002, and the other 00 won shall be paid in May 24, 2002, and the seller, the buyer, and the broker, and Kim H and Park FF shall be sealed with their seals, while the Plaintiff’s seal is affixed thereon.

O With respect to the instant housing, the Plaintiff took a total of 000 maximum debt amount (2 cases) and obtained a loan of 000 won from the O bank, and was liable for the same amount even at the time of May 24, 2002, which was the date of conclusion of the sales contract.

O On June 10, 2002, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer for the reason of sale on June 4, 2002 with respect to the instant housing, so that other creditors may not seize (a) the instant housing in the situation where only the down payment was paid.

C. On June 20, 2002, ParkCC set up a collateral for the instant house, which is a maximum debt amount of 000 won, and borrowed 000 won from the OCC. On the same day, the Plaintiff repaid 000 won, including the principal and interest of loan, to the OCC, and the Plaintiff cancelled each collateral for the instant house as the debtor.

O ParkCC on June 20, 2002 sold O apartment 00 00 00 000 O apartment in Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, O00 on its own.

C. On May 24, 2002, ParkF and JungG engaged in the real estate brokerage business, and at the time of the conclusion of the instant sales contract, the price of the Lyalian floor of the apartment house, such as the instant apartment house, was 000 won. The Plaintiff requested the instant house as a sales agent, and the price was 00 won higher than that of the purchase price, and introduced the instant house to Kim HH, who was aware of the amount of fine, and on May 24, 2002, LyCC did not attend, and prepared a certificate of No. 3 with the Plaintiff and Kim H, who attended the Plaintiff and Kim H only, as the buyer, and the Plaintiff did not affix his seal.

O) Statement that it was not written that those who were employees of ParkF and JungG, and that the market price of the housing of this case was 000 won or more at the time of the conclusion of the instant sales contract, and that there was no fact that the instant contract was prepared for the business.

C. On May 24, 2002, the reason why the purchase of the instant house was stated to the effect that it was similar to regularG, and on May 24, 2002, since the Plaintiff had no seal at the time of entering into the sales contract, the real estate broker affixed his seal at the time of entering into the sales contract, and if he again affixed his seal at the time of entering into the sales contract, it would be possible for the real estate broker to enter into the contract under whose name he did not participate, and since he could enter into the contract in whose name he did not participate, he could enter into the name of the husband at the time of his 0th, so it would be possible for the real estate broker to enter into the sales contract in his name at the time of his 0th, 00, and 00, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000,000 won, and 0,000,000,00.

C) The above facts are recognized as follows, i.e., the collateral obligation 7 and 00 million won are established for the instant housing, and the agreement to pay 00 won for the intermediate payment other than the down payment of 00 won as indicated in the evidence No. 1 is very exceptional in trade practice, and the statement about the method of payment of 00 won and the source of funds of the purchase price of Kim H and Park Standards, and the preparation of evidence No. 3 is very specific and objective facts at the time, and it is difficult for the Plaintiff to prepare a contract under the name of 0GH and ParkCC, and to prepare a new contract in order to transfer the remaining 00 won under the name of 00,000 won, and the Plaintiff received 00 won for the remainder of 00,000 won and 00 won for the remainder of 00,000 won for each of the instant housing and 200,000 won for the remainder of 200,000 won for the Plaintiff’s own loan, and 200,000.

3. Conclusion

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