early 2010 Heavy0638 (2010.06.01)

The land is transferred by payment in kind;

The imposition of capital gains tax on the premise that the land was transferred by payment in kind is lawful, and the plaintiff's assertion that the gift was made is groundless

2010Guhap3621 Revocation of Disposition of Imposing capital gains tax

Note AA

○ Head of tax office

April 12, 201

May 31, 201

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

The imposition of capital gains tax of KRW 131,090,070 on the Plaintiff on November 17, 2009 shall be revoked.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. With respect to ○○○○, ○○○, ○○, ○○○, ○○○, 317 square meters prior to 000 square meters, 972 square meters prior to 000 square meters prior to 000, 545 square meters prior to 000 square meters, 149 square meters prior to 00 square meters of the same Ri, and 499 square meters prior to 000 square meters of the same Ri (hereinafter “instant land”), the registration of transfer of ownership was completed on July 25, 198 on the ground of sale under the Plaintiff’s name, and thereafter, on July 24, 2007, the registration of transfer of ownership was completed on the ground of donation to thisA.

B. On October 31, 2007, thisA filed a gift tax return stating the value of the instant land as KRW 179,705,000.

C. On November 17, 2009, the Defendant deemed that the Plaintiff transferred the instant land to thisA as a substitute payment, and revoked the gift tax, and issued the instant disposition that corrected and notified KRW 131,090,070 to the Plaintiff in 2007.

D. The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal on February 11, 2010, and received a decision of dismissal on June 1 of the same year, and filed the instant lawsuit.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1 to 3 (including each number, if any), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

Although the Plaintiff donated the instant land to the extent that it is difficult for the Plaintiff to live in this case due to the circumstances that the Plaintiff was aware of it for a long time, the instant disposition that imposed capital gains tax on the transfer of it is unlawful.

(b) Related statutes;

It is as shown in the attached Form.

C. Determination

Comprehensively taking account of the purport of the entire arguments in the statement in Eul evidence 4-1 through 5, the plaintiff borrowed KRW 80,000,000 from Lee on December 23, 2006, and KRW 30,000,000 from the same month until April 15, 2007, and paid KRW 40,000,00,00 as interest, etc. with the revenue of △△ apartment sales commission, and the plaintiff paid KRW 80,00,00,000, interest KRW 40,000,000, 40,000, 40,000, 10,000, 10,000,000, 170,000,000, 31, 30,000,000, 208, 207, 2008, 2008, 2008.

Therefore, the disposition of this case based on the premise that the plaintiff transferred the land of this case to thisA as payment in kind is legitimate, and the plaintiff's assertion is therefore without merit.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.