(영문) 대전지방법원 2015.11.13 2015구단100039

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대전지방법원 2015.11.13 2015구단100039

양도소득세부과처분취소

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 May 20, 2003 with respect to forest land B (former lot number) 13,616 square meters (hereinafter “the instant forest land”), the registration of ownership transfer was completed on May 20, 200, and the registration of ownership transfer was completed on August 23, 2003 by co-owners C and D, respectively.

B. On August 26, 2003, the Plaintiff filed a preliminary return of KRW 564,00,000 for the transfer value of the forest of this case with the acquisition value of KRW 30 million and KRW 26 million for the Defendant.

C. On March 6, 2014, the Defendant issued to the Plaintiff a disposition to increase the transfer value of the instant forest in KRW 20 million, acquisition value of KRW 26 million, tax base of KRW 170,564,00, and KRW 132,629,910 for the year 2003 (including additional tax) (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 2-1 to 5, Gap evidence 3, Eul evidence 3 and 8, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is a title trustee who lent the ownership of the instant forest upon the E’s request.

Therefore, the instant disposition is unlawful.

B. Determination 1) The plaintiff bears the burden of proving that the ownership of income is merely nominal and there is a person who actually obtains the income (see Supreme Court Decision 84Nu505, Dec. 11, 1984). 2) The plaintiff is a title trustee of the forest of this case, and there is no other evidence to prove that the plaintiff is a title trustee of the forest of this case. The statement of No. 4, the statement of No. 5 and No. 6, the witness F's testimony is difficult to believe in light of the witness Eul's testimony, the statement of No. 5 and No. 6, the statement of No. 5, No. 6, the statement of No. 1 and No. 3, and the witness G's testimony, and there is no other evidence to prove it.

3. Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion is without merit, and the disposition of this case is legitimate.

3. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

참조판례

-대법원 1984. 12. 11. 선고 84누505 판결

유사 판례

-대전지방법원 2015. 11. 13. 선고 2015구단100039 판결

-대전고등법원 2017.11.08 2015누13725

-서울행정법원 2015.11.24 2015구단2362

-대전지방법원 2015.09.04 2014구단100254

-대전지방법원 2015.07.10 2015구단100060