Incheon District Court 2010Gudan846 ( October 10, 2011)

early 2010 Heavy015 (2010.03.08)

One house for one household shall not meet the requirements for non-taxation;

Whether the requirements for non-taxation for one household are satisfied is determined on the basis of objective facts, not on the basis of the taxpayer’s subjective perception. Therefore, even if the Plaintiff was unaware of the spouse’s acquisition of shares in housing, it was erroneous that the Plaintiff deemed that the Plaintiff was a house owned by the spouse, and that the requirements for non-taxation for

2011Nu10203 Revocation of disposition of imposing capital gains tax

KimA

Deputy Director of the Tax Office

Incheon District Court Decision 2010Gudan846 Decided February 10, 2011

July 19, 2011

September 20, 2011

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The decision of the first instance shall be revoked. The defendant's disposition of November 9, 2009 (" November 12, 2009" appears to be clerical error) against the plaintiff shall be revoked in the imposition of capital gains tax of 55,729, and 270 won for the portion belonging to the year 2008.

The reasoning for this court's explanation concerning this case is as follows, except that the court's ruling "as of November 12, 2009," "as of November 9, 2009," and "as of November 2, 2009," is the same as the reasoning for the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as of the ground for appeal. Thus, the judgment of the court of first instance is just as this conclusion, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as of November 9, 2009, and it is so decided as per Disposition.