Whether it is legitimate to calculate the transfer value by parcel at the time of comprehensive transfer according to the standard market price ratio.

The original disposition is made by calculating the transfer value in proportion to the standard market price ratio by parcel at the time of a comprehensive transfer of land, the actual transaction price of which is unclear, without indicating the purchase price and the flat price in the contract.

Article 100 (Calculation of Gains on Transfer of Income Tax Act)

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

The Defendant’s disposition of imposition of capital gains tax of KRW 35,756,074 against the Plaintiff on January 10, 2007 and KRW 3,575,600 shall be revoked.

1. Details of the instant disposition

The following facts are not disputed between the parties, or acknowledged by considering the whole purport of the pleadings in each entry of Gap evidence 1-2, A2-2, A2-3, A6-1 through 13, and Eul evidence 1-2.

A. On or before July 1996, the Plaintiff acquired and cultivated the land listed in the annexed list 1 through 4 (hereinafter referred to as "self-arable land") and received a successful bid through the auction procedure on August 18, 2005, "B." The Plaintiff submitted all the land listed in the annexed list 12, 13 (hereinafter referred to as "the land owned by the wife") as well as the land listed in the annexed list 12, 13 (hereinafter referred to as "the land owned by the wife"), which is located in the plaintiff's wife around Sep. 1, 2005, to the ○○, Seob, ○○, ○○ (hereinafter referred to as "○○, etc.") on or before the day of sale, on August 16, 2005, the registration of ownership transfer was completed on or after the ground of sale. After that, on or around November 30, 2005, the Plaintiff did not divide the above person's land into the successful bid price and the actual market price calculated by lots as the sale price.

D. However, as a result of a field investigation on the sale of self-owned farmland, successful bid farmland, and land owned by the Defendant (hereinafter “sale farmland in this case”), the Defendant’s total purchase price is 385,000,000 won, and the transfer income tax is reduced or exempted in accordance with Article 69(1) of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act in the case of self-owned farmland. In the case of successful bid farmland, the Defendant calculated the transfer price of KRW 250,458,812 in the aggregate of the amount calculated by dividing the actual transaction price by the standard market price ratio according to Article 100(2) of the Income Tax Act in the case of the successful bid farmland, the transfer price is calculated as KRW 250,458,812 in the amount calculated by dividing the actual transaction price by the unit price ratio, and on January 10, 207, imposed KRW 35,756,074, resident tax, resident tax, 3,575,600 on the Plaintiff’s transfer

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The purport of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the sales farmland of this case was sold to ○○, etc. in total 385,00,000 won. In the case of successful bid farmland, the successful bid price of KRW 180,00,000 is as is, and in the case of farmland including self-arable farmland, orchard of KRW 100,00 per square, and the answer of KRW 32,000 as 32,00 is determined (successful farmland price of KRW 180,000 + the sum of KRW 185,10,000 among the remaining farmland + the sum of KRW 185,10,000 + the sum of KRW 633,256,000 in total, the amount of KRW 385,356,000 in total, and KRW 356,500 in this case’s among them), and thus, the Defendant’s disposal of farmland in this case should be deemed to be unlawful in calculating the transfer price of farmland in accordance with the standard market price.

(b) Related statutes;

(1) In the calculation of gains on transfer, Article 100 (1) of the Income Tax Act provides that, if the transfer value is based on the actual transaction value, the acquisition value shall be based on the actual transaction value and if the transfer value is based on the standard market price, the acquisition value shall also be based on the standard market price. In the application of the provisions of paragraph (2), where the transfer value or acquisition value is calculated on the basis of the actual transaction value and where the land and buildings are acquired or transferred together, they shall be divided and entered, and where the classification of the land and buildings is unclear, it shall be calculated on the basis of the standard market price at the time of acquisition or transfer as prescribed by the Presidential Decree. In

(2) In applying Article 166(6) of the Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act, Article 100(2) of the Act provides that where the distinction between the value of land and buildings is unclear, it shall be calculated in accordance with the proviso of Article 48-2(4) of the Enforcement Decree of the Value-Adde

(3) Article 48-2(4)1 proviso of the Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act provides that where the distinction between the value of land and the value of buildings, etc. is unclear among the actual transaction values, if there are all the standard market prices under Article 99 of the Income Tax Act on land and buildings, etc., it shall be calculated in proportion to the

(c) Fact of recognition;

The following facts are not in dispute between the parties, or acknowledged by considering the whole purport of the pleadings as a whole on Gap evidence 4 through 7, Gap evidence 3-9, Eul evidence 5, Eul evidence 6, and witness evidence ○○○○'s testimony.

(1) The plaintiff was awarded a successful bid in KRW 179,77,776 on July 11, 2005.

(2) On July 27, 2005, when the Plaintiff entered into a contract to sell all the instant farmland to Seocho ○○, etc., the Plaintiff did not specify the sales amount separately for each piece of farmland, but made 385,00,000 won of the total sales amount. 50,000 won of the down payment is paid at the time of a contract, and the remainder of 335,000,000 won shall be paid at the time of a contract, and on August 25, 2005, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract (Evidence 2-4) to the effect that the Plaintiff will make a sales contract on behalf of the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff will transfer the ownership of the successful bid to the buyer.

(3) Accordingly, the amount of KRW 37,00,000 on July 27, 2005, KRW 172,00,000 on August 18, 2005, KRW 50,000 on August 26, 2005, KRW 60,000 on September 6, 2005, KRW 60,000 on September 6, 2005, and KRW 5,000 on September 1, 2005, and KRW 47,860,00 on September 13, 200, and the remaining amount of KRW 13,140,00 on September 13, 205 were calculated after the registration of ownership transfer.

(4) After the conclusion of the above sales contract on August 16, 2005, the Plaintiff drafted a separate sales contract (No. 5,6,7 of the evidence No. 2) for the self-employed farmland and the successful bid farmland under an agreement with Ma○○○, an individual. The above sales contract states that in the case of land No. 1 or (10), the seller, the buyer, the buyer, the ○○, the ○○○, and the ○○, and the purchase price are not separately determined by lots, and that in the case of land No. 24,00,000, the purchase price shall be KRW 24,000, and the buyer, the ○○, the 30,000,000,000.

(5) Meanwhile, as seen in the above 1.C., the Plaintiff filed a preliminary return of capital gains tax on the self-arable farmland and the awarded farmland, and submitted a sales contract with the documents related to the actual transaction price for the above approval seal.

D. Determination

(1) First, according to the Plaintiff’s assertion and the facts found in Section C above, the transfer value of the farmland in this case is KRW 385,00,000, which is the actual purchase price.

(2) Following the issues of this case, namely, whether the transfer value of farmland in this case is divided by parcel or successful bid price of 1.3 billion won, i.e., farmland in this case and land owned by its wife (whether the successful bid price is divided by own farmland or land owned by its wife) are 385,00,000 won, and the actual purchase price of farmland in this case is 385,000 won in each of the following circumstances, and it is difficult to view that the sale price of farmland in this case is calculated by parcel or by own farmland, successful bid, and land owned by the plaintiff as well as only the sale price of 1.3 billion won in each of the above facts, and that it is difficult to view that the sale price of farmland in this case is 00,000 won in each of the above facts, excluding the sale price of farmland in this case as 274,000 won in each of the above facts at the time of the preliminary bid price of 1.3 billion won in each of the above facts.

(3) In full view of the above circumstances, since the transfer of farmland in this case constitutes a case where the distinction between the values of land under Article 100(2) of the Income Tax Act is unclear, the disposition in this case calculated by calculating the transfer value of the successful bid farmland according to the standard market price ratio by parcel according to the actual transaction price of the sold farmland in this case is lawful, and the plaintiff's assertion in this regard

3. Conclusion

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