The method of calculating capital gains where the acquisition value of real estate is unclear;

In the purchase of the instant real estate, the Plaintiffs’ net value was not only a sales contract but also a sales contract was not prepared, and the seller did not keep the sales price on the part of the seller, and only the total value of other land is indicated in other documents, and the acquisition value is not clearly known. Therefore, the transfer value and the acquisition value shall be calculated based on the statutory standard price.

Article 23 of the former Income Tax Act (Act No. 3168 of Aug. 14, 1979), Article 170 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act (Presidential Decree No. 9229 of Dec. 30, 1978)

Supreme Court Decision 80Nu95 Decided July 8, 1980, 82Nu138 Decided February 22, 1983

Plaintiff 1 et al., Counsel for the plaintiff 1 and one other, for the defendant-appellant-appellee.

Head of Sungnam Tax Office

Seoul High Court Decision 82Gu168 delivered on February 17, 1983

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

The grounds of appeal by the defendant litigant are examined.

According to Article 23 (5) of the Income Tax Act and Article 170 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, the transfer value and acquisition value in calculating the transfer income tax for imposition of transfer income tax shall be based on the actual transaction value, if the transfer value and acquisition value are not clear, and their transfer value and acquisition value shall be based on the same actual transaction value or different current transaction value, and even if one of the actual transaction value is unclear, their transfer value and acquisition value shall be based on the same current transaction value (see Supreme Court Decision 80Nu95 delivered on July 8, 1980). Thus, in this case, the court below is just in determining the transfer value and acquisition value based on the evidence of the city, and it is not clear that the plaintiffs did not prepare a sales contract in the circumstances at the time of purchase of the forest of this case from the non-party school foundation under the evidence of the court below at the time of purchase, and it is not clear that the sale value and acquisition value were recorded in the related books on the part of the above private teaching institute, and it cannot be determined based on the above legal reasoning.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of the appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Kim Jung-soo (Presiding Justice)