Where a corporation receives a blanket bid for land, buildings, structures, standing trees, etc. and transfers some of the real estate, whether the acquisition value of the transferred real estate is unclear or not.

If a juristic person receives a blanket bid of land, buildings, structures, standing trees, etc. and transfers some of them, the acquisition value of the total assets shall be clearly determined, but the acquisition value of the transferred real estate shall not be determined in a lump sum, and the acquisition value of the transferred real estate shall be determined in accordance with the method prescribed in subparagraph 2 of Article 59-2 (3) of the former Corporate Tax Act (amended by Act No. 4282, Dec. 31, 190) as it constitutes “where the classification of the value of land, buildings, and other assets is unclear” under Article 124-2 (3) of the Enforcement Decree of the Corporate Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 13195, Dec. 31, 1990) and thus, the acquisition value of the transferred real estate is unclear.

Article 59-2(3) of the former Corporate Tax Act (Amended by Act No. 4282, Dec. 31, 1990); Article 124-2(3)2 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Corporate Tax Act (Amended by Presidential Decree No. 13195, Dec. 31, 1990);

Attorney Cho Sung-soo et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellee-appellant of the Han Sung-chulng Law Association

head of Dongjak-gu Tax Office

Seoul High Court Decision 94Gu16955 delivered on December 16, 1994

The judgment below is reversed and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

We examine the Defendant’s ground of appeal.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below: (a) calculated the transfer value of the above real estate on June 8, 1990 and the transfer value of the above real estate under Article 6546 of the Enforcement Decree of the Corporate Tax Act on the ground that the transfer value of the above real estate was calculated on the ground that the transfer value of the above real estate was calculated on the ground that the transfer value of the above real estate was 10,90,020 square meters and 10,000 square meters and 36,00 square meters, and 21,000 square meters and 530 square meters and 530 (hereinafter the whole real estate of this case) as 10,965,583,520, and the transfer value of the above real estate was calculated on the basis that the transfer value of the above real estate was calculated on the basis that the transfer value of the above real estate was calculated on the basis of 10,000,000 won and 9,010,000 won.

However, as determined by the court below, if the Plaintiff acquired the entire real estate of this case in total amount of KRW 10,965,583,520 on June 8, 1990 and transferred the real estate of this case at KRW 5,565,241,00 among them on September 18, 1990, the transfer value of the real estate of this case is clear, and on the other hand, the transfer value of the real estate of this case is not clear, but the acquisition value of the real estate of this case is not divided by the relation of the real estate of this case acquired at the time of acquisition without specifying each value of the acquired asset at the time of acquisition. This constitutes "when the classification of the value of the land, building, or other asset is unclear" under Article 124-2 (3) of the Enforcement Decree of the above Act and it is not clear that the acquisition value of the transferred real estate of this case can be calculated by calculating the transfer value of the real estate of this case in accordance with Article 124-2 (3) 2 of the above Enforcement Decree.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the calculation of transfer margin in the special surtax (However, although the plaintiff asserted that the transfer of the transferred real estate in this case was transferred by the complaint as the above transfer value, it can be seen that the transfer value of the transferred real estate in this case is the transfer value of the transferred real estate in calculating the transfer margin of the transferred real estate in this case and the defendant deducted only the acquisition value of land among the transferred real estate in this case. Thus, the court below should determine the transfer value of the transferred real estate in this case.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the court below for a new trial and determination. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Cho Chang-tae (Presiding Justice)