A. The point of time to determine whether the idle land is excluded from capital gains tax reduction or exemption under the former Regulation of Tax Reduction or Exemption Act

B. Whether Article 20-6 of the former Enforcement Rule of the Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption Act exceeds the delegation scope of the parent law

C. Whether the amendment of the Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption Act is against the principle of equity in the imposition of taxes in a case where the application of the Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption is disadvantaged.

A. The phrase “land subject to the land excess profit tax under the provisions of the Land Excess Profit Tax Act”, which is excluded from the reduction or exemption of the transfer income tax under Article 66-3 of the former Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption Act (amended by Act No. 4285 of Dec. 31, 190), means idle land, etc. falling under the provisions of Article 8 of the Land Excess Gains Tax Act, and it is reasonable to interpret that the determination of whether such idle land falls under such idle land as of the date of transfer according to the general principle of imposition of the transfer income tax, unless there are other special circumstances.

B. Article 20-6 of the former Enforcement Rule of the Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption Act (amended by the Ordinance of the Ministry of Finance and Economy No. 1850 of March 13, 191) provides that “The determination of whether the land is subject to the land excess profit tax under Article 66-3 of the Act shall be based on whether the land falls under the idle land as of the date of transfer shall be based on whether it falls under the idle land as of the date of transfer shall not be deemed to have

C. The provisions of Article 66-3 of the former Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption Act (amended by Act No. 4165 of Dec. 30, 1989) stipulate that the application of capital gains tax reduction and exemption provisions shall be excluded regardless of the time of acquisition, regardless of the time of acquisition, as long as it constitutes idle land. This provision is amended by Act No. 4285 of Dec. 31, 1990, which provides that only the land acquired after January 1, 1990 among idle land shall be reduced to be excluded from capital gains tax reduction and exemption. As a result, a person who acquired the land before January 1, 1990, where the provision was enforced prior to the amendment of the land, was transferred from January 1, 1990 to December 31 of the same year, 190 where the provision was enforced, it cannot be deemed that it goes against the principle of equity in imposing capital gains tax.

A.C. Article 66-3(b) of the former Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption Act (amended by Act No. 4285, Dec. 30, 1990); Article 20-6(c) of the former Enforcement Rule of the Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption Act (amended by Ordinance of the Ministry of Finance and Economy No. 1850, Mar. 13, 1991). Article 18(1)

(a) Supreme Court Decision 92Nu15925 delivered on February 26, 1993 (Gong1993Sang, 1111) 92Nu14045 delivered on May 25, 1993 (Gong1993Ha, 1923) 93Nu21361 delivered on February 8, 1994 (Gong194Sang, 1032)

Plaintiff

Head of the Tax Office;

Seoul High Court Decision 93Gu26771 delivered on March 30, 1994

The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

The plaintiff's grounds of appeal are examined.

1. On the first ground for appeal

The term “land subject to the land excess profit tax under the provisions of the Land Excess Profit Tax Act”, which was newly established by Act No. 4165 of Dec. 30, 1989 and excluded capital gains tax under Article 66-3 of the Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption Act before amended by Act No. 4285 of Dec. 31, 1990, means idle land, etc. which falls under the provisions of Article 8 of the Land Excess Profit Tax Act, and it is reasonable to interpret that determination of whether such idle land falls under such idle land as of the date of transfer according to the general principles of imposition of capital gains tax, unless there are other special circumstances; therefore, it is reasonable to interpret that the determination of whether such idle land falls under such idle land as of the date of transfer as of April 10, 1990, which was newly established by Ordinance of the Ministry of Finance and Economy No. 1822 of Mar. 13, 199; the determination of whether the land excess profit tax under the provisions of Article 66-3 of the Act is subject to taxation under the Act No. 2939.25.

In this regard, the court below is just in holding that the land of this case transferred by the plaintiff to the Jinsung Housing Co., Ltd. constitutes idle land which is excluded from capital gains tax reduction as of the date of transfer, and the disposition of this case is lawful. The judgment below did not err by misapprehending the legal principles as to the theory of lawsuit, etc.

2. On the second ground for appeal

Article 66-3 of the Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption Act (amended by Act No. 4165 of Dec. 30, 1989) provides that the provisions of the Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption Act (amended by Act No. 4285 of Dec. 31, 1990) shall be excluded from the application of capital gains tax reduction and exemption regardless of the time of acquisition as long as it constitutes idle land. This provision provides that only the land acquired after January 1, 1990 among idle land shall be reduced to be excluded from the capital gains tax reduction and exemption, and as a result, a person who acquired the land before January 1, 1990, when the provisions of the Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption Act (amended by Act No. 4165 of Dec. 31, 1990) were enforced, and even if it was transferred between January 1, 199 and December 31 of the same year, it cannot be deemed that it goes against the principle

3. Therefore, the appeal shall be dismissed and all costs of appeal shall be assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Shin Sung-sung (Presiding Justice)