logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2017. 09. 29. 선고 2017누51411 판결
비과세주택 및 상가로 이루어진 겸용주택 일괄양도시 비과세주택분 양도차익의 안분계산은 기준시가 기준으로 함[국승]
Case Number of the immediately preceding lawsuit

Seoul Administrative Court-2017-Gu Group-2083 ( October 17, 2017)

Case Number of the previous trial

Cho High Court Decision 2016Do3640 ( December 15, 2016)

Title

When a combined transfer of a house consisting of non-taxable houses and commercial buildings is made, the calculation method of non-taxable housing gains shall be based on the standard market price.

Summary

Where land and buildings are transferred in a lump sum, gains on transfer shall be kept separately, and where the transfer value of land and buildings cannot be distinguished from the transfer value, each standard market price ratio shall be divided, and where a building is combined, the standard market price of the housing part, the standard market price of the building part, and the standard market price of the building part shall be the individual publication price.

Related statutes

Article 89, 99, and 100 of the Income Tax Act, Article 154, and Article 166 of the Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act

Cases

2017Nu51411 Revocation of disposition of imposing capital gains tax

Plaintiff

KimA

Defendant

O Head of tax office

Conclusion of Pleadings

September 15, 2017

Imposition of Judgment

September 29, 2017

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked. On August 1, 2016, the Defendant revoked the part exceeding 111,800 won of the imposition of capital gains tax of 31,719,400 won (including additional tax) for the Plaintiff for the year 2015 (the Plaintiff partially reduced the purport of the claim and appeal in the trial).

Reasons

1. Quotation of the reasons for the judgment of the first instance;

The reason for this judgment is that the first instance court's decision is identical to that of Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, except where the first instance court's decision "the disposition of this case exceeds 11,800 won" as "the part exceeding 111,80 won out of the disposition of this case", and the 4th 17th 17th 17th 17th 17th 1.

2. Conclusion

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

arrow