Suwon District Court-2017-Gu Group-8020 ( October 27, 2017)

Litigation Revocation of Capital Gains Tax Imposition Disposition

(1) The legality of the determination of the officially assessed individual land price of the instant land, whether the instant land is subject to the long-term possession special deductible deduction as the business land, and whether the non-reported additional tax is lawful

The contents of the judgment are the same as the attachment.

2017Nu83043 Revocation of Disposition of Imposing capital gains tax

Kim*

AA Head of the Tax Office

March 22, 2018

April 5, 2018

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked. The Defendant’s imposition of capital gains tax of KRW 74,124,464 on August 17, 2016 against the Plaintiff on August 17, 2016 shall be revoked.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasons for the judgment of this court are as follows: ① 1 to 4 pages 1 of the first instance judgment (Article 97 (1) 1 (a) of the Income Tax Act, Article 163 (9) of the Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act). The term "Article 97 (1) 1 (a) of the former Income Tax Act (Amended by Act No. 15225, Dec. 19, 2017); Article 163 (9) of the Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act / [Article 60 (1) (main sentence) of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act)"; ② The term "three pages of the first instance judgment (Amended by Act No. 14388, Dec. 20, 2016)".

Article 60(1) main sentence of "Article 60(1)", 3, 6, 11 of the 6th 11 letter "three months" is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for cases where the "three months" is deemed "two months", and thus, it shall be cited by the main sentence of Article 8(2)

2. Conclusion

Since the judgment of the first instance is justifiable, the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is groundless.