Jeonju District Court 2009Guhap581 ( December 22, 2009)

Examination, transfer 208-0235 ( December 12, 2008)

The transfer value confirmed as actual transaction value may exceed the standard market price.

There is no ground to interpret that the transfer income tax calculated does not exceed the transfer income tax calculated on the basis of the standard market price in the case of confirming the actual transaction price pursuant to the proviso of Article 114 (4) of the

The contents of the decision shall be the same as attached.

Article 94 (Scope of Transfer Income Tax)

Article 95 (Transfer Income Amount)

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked. The imposition of capital gains tax of KRW 80,156,080 on March 5, 2008 by the defendant against the plaintiff on March 5, 2008 shall be revoked.

1. Quotation and additional determination of judgment of the first instance;

The reasoning for this Court’s explanation concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for adding the following judgments to the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, this Court’s reasoning is cited as it is in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and

E.B. Additional Determination

In addition to the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 8 through 10 submitted by the court of the trial, there is no fact that the plaintiff submitted a report of this case or delegated to prepare and submit it, and this* is insufficient to recognize the plaintiff's assertion that the broker voluntarily requested the tax accountant office to submit the report of this case.

2. Conclusion

Therefore, the judgment of the first instance is just, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.