Procedural requirements for capital gains tax reduction or exemption under Article 57 (1) 1 of the former Regulation of Tax Reduction or Exemption Act

In full view of the provisions of Article 57 (1) 1 and (4) of the former Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption Act (amended by Act No. 4666 of Dec. 31, 1993), and Article 47 (2) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 14084 of Dec. 31, 1993), in order for a public project operator to have capital gains tax reduced or exempted pursuant to Article 57 (1) 1 of the same Act, he/she shall make an application for tax reduction or exemption within the prescribed period under Article 47 (2) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, and if he/she does not make an application for tax reduction or exemption within the prescribed period, he/she shall not be exempted from capital gains tax.

Article 57(1)1 and (4) of the former Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption Act (amended by Act No. 4666 of Dec. 31, 1993); Article 47(2) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 14084 of Dec. 31, 1993)

Supreme Court Decision 88Nu1462 delivered on May 24, 198 (Gong1988, 1007) Supreme Court Decision 90Nu5542 delivered on September 25, 1990 (Gong1990, 2202) Supreme Court Decision 92Nu17273 Delivered on May 25, 1993 (Gong193Ha, 1926), Supreme Court Decision 93Nu1177 delivered on January 25, 1994 (Gong194, 851)

Plaintiff (Attorney Yoon Young-ok, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

The Director of Gangnam District Office

Seoul High Court Decision 95Gu7972 delivered on June 29, 1995

The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

In full view of the provisions of Article 57 (1) 1 and (4) of the former Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption Act (amended by Act No. 4666 of Dec. 31, 1993), and Article 47 (2) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 14084 of Dec. 31, 1993), in order for a public project operator to be subjected to reduction and exemption of capital gains tax pursuant to Article 57 (1) 1 of the same Act, he/she shall file an application for tax reduction or exemption within the prescribed period under Article 47 (2) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, and if he/she does not file an application for tax reduction or exemption within the prescribed period, he/she shall not be exempted from capital gains tax (see Supreme Court Decisions 88Nu1462, May 24, 198; 90Nu542, Sept. 25, 199).

The judgment of the court below to the same purport is justified, and there is no violation of law as alleged in the ground of appeal, such as an error of law or violation of law which interpreted the law in conflict with the Supreme Court precedents.

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

Justices Park Jong-ho (Presiding Justice)