logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2018.04.03 2017구합52434
취득세등부과처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On July 14, 2011, the Defendant: (a) designated the Plaintiff and Chotech Co., Ltd.; (b) gold ethyl Co., Ltd.; and (c) three-dimensional metals Co., Ltd. as the project implementer of the development project for the Kim Sea General Industrial Complex (hereinafter “instant development project”); and (c) announced the designation as the project implementer under Article 2011-101 of the

B. On December 12, 2013, the project implementer of the instant development project, including the Plaintiff, obtained authorization for the completion of the instant development project from the Kimhae market. On December 31, 2013, the Plaintiff was exempted from acquisition tax pursuant to the main sentence of Article 78(1) of the former Restriction of Special Local Taxation Act (amended by Act No. 12175, Jan. 1, 2014) by acquiring a factory site of 773m2,280.7m2 (hereinafter “instant land”) in order to create an industrial complex of the instant development project and build subsequent industrial buildings, etc.

C. However, the Plaintiff did not construct industrial buildings, etc. on the instant land until now.

On February 13, 2017, the Defendant issued a prior notice of taxation to the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff did not build a new industrial building within three years after the completion of industrial complex construction works without justifiable grounds, and thus constitutes grounds for additional collection under the proviso of Article 78(3) of the former Restriction of Special Local Taxation Act.

E. On March 16, 2017, the Plaintiff filed a request for pre-assessment review with the Standing Do Governor, but the Gyeongnam Do Governor did not adopt a request for pre-assessment review on April 13, 2017.

F. On May 11, 2017, the Defendant imposed acquisition tax of the instant land KRW 161,543,160 on the Plaintiff, local education tax of KRW 13,526,310, and special rural development tax of KRW 6,763,150 on the Plaintiff.

(hereinafter referred to as "each disposition of this case") / [Grounds for recognition] Gap 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 13 evidence, Eul 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The attachment to the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes shall be as follows;

3. Whether each of the dispositions of this case is legitimate.

arrow