In the case of land transaction falling under Article 72 (3) 6 of the Regulations on the Management of Property Tax Investigation (National Tax Service Directive No. 980), whether the purpose of speculation should be recognized again to impose capital gains tax on the basis of the actual transaction price (negative)

If a land transaction is eligible to impose capital gains tax on the basis of the actual transaction price under Article 170(4)2 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 12767 of Aug. 1, 1989), and falls under a transaction under Article 72(3)6 of the Regulations on the Management of Property Tax Investigation (amended by the National Tax Service Directive No. 980) designated by the Commissioner of the National Tax Service, the purpose of speculation should not be recognized again.

Articles 23 and 45 of the Income Tax Act; Article 170 (4) 2 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 12767 of Aug. 1, 1989); Article 72 (3) 6 of the Regulations on the Management of Property Tax (National Tax Service Directive No. 980)

Attorney Lee Young-hee et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Gangwon-gu Director of the District Office

Seoul High Court Decision 89Gu9717 delivered on July 18, 1990

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

With respect to No. 1:

According to the facts established by the court below, since the land of this case is located in the Myeon area and the total area acquired during one taxation period is not less than 10,000 and the tax base amount of registration tax is not less than 50,000,000 won, the land of this case is so that the land of this case can be imposed on the actual transaction price pursuant to Article 170 (4) 2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 12767 of Aug. 1, 1989) which was enforced at the time of the transfer of the land of this case, and it constitutes a transaction under Article 72 (3) 6 of the Regulations on the Management of Property Tax Investigation (amended by Presidential Decree No. 980 of the National Tax Service Directive) designated by the Commissioner of the National Tax Service, and the purpose of speculation should

With respect to the second ground:

The Supreme Court Decision of the lawsuit (Supreme Court Decision 86Nu484 delivered on September 29, 1987) seems to be based on whether it falls under the types of speculative transactions listed in each subparagraph of Article 72(3) of the Regulations on the Investigation of Property Taxes, and whether it falls under each of the above subparagraphs, and then, it cannot be said that the purpose of this decision is to determine whether such transactions were made for speculative purposes. The grounds for appeal are without merit.

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

Justices Kim Young-ju (Presiding Justice)