Article 142 (1) 1 (7) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act (Presidential Decree No. 8339 of Dec. 31, 1976) (amended by Presidential Decree No. 8339 of Dec. 31),

The period of "five years" under Article 142 (1) 1 (7) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act (Presidential Decree No. 8339 of Dec. 31, 1976) shall be calculated from January 1, 1977, the enforcement date of the above Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act. Thus, even if the land acquired before December 31, 1976 by a financial institution for the purpose of preserving or exercising its claim, the land for which five years have not passed since January 1, 1977 is not the land for non-business use of the corporation.

Article 142 (1) 1 (7) of the Enforcement Decree of the former Local Tax Act

Supreme Court Decision 80Nu219 Decided August 26, 1980, Supreme Court Decision 80Nu154 Decided November 11, 1980

Attorney Cho Jae-Hy et al., Counsel for the defendant

Attorney Hwang Sung-sung et al., Counsel for the defendant

Seoul High Court Decision 79Gu270 delivered on February 26, 1980

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate brief being filed after the deadline for submitting the appellate brief).

Even if a financial institution acquired land for the purpose of preserving or exercising its claim before January 1, 1977, which was amended by the Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act (Presidential Decree No. 839) as of December 31, 1977, the five-year period stipulated in Article 142 (1) 1 (7) of the Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act should be calculated from January 1, 197 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 80Nu154, Nov. 11, 1980; 80Nu219, Aug. 26, 1980; 80Nu219, Nov. 16, 197). The court below's decision that the Plaintiff bank did not enter the above list of land in the first list for non-business purposes into the above list of 197Da19771, Mar. 30, 197; 197Da1974, Nov. 16, 1977

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench regarding the burden of the costs of the appeal.

Justices Lee Il-su (Presiding Justice)