Seoul Administrative Court 2010Gudan25568 (O4.06)

Seocho 2010west 1328 (Law No. 28, 2010.28)

The requirements for reduction or exemption shall not be met without being registered as a rental business operator;

The requirements for reduction or exemption of capital gains tax on newly-built rental houses are not satisfied because it is not a rental business operator because it is not registered under the Rental Housing Act, and the head of the competent district tax office did not submit a report on rental

2011Nu13561 Revocation of disposition of imposing capital gains tax

LAA

The Director of the Pacific District Office

Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2010Gudan25568 decided April 6, 2011

September 28, 2011

October 19, 2011

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked. The imposition of capital gains tax of 33,286, and 760 won imposed on the plaintiff on March 10, 2010 by the defendant shall be revoked.

1. cite the judgment of the first instance;

[The reasons for the judgment of this court are as follows: The reasons for the judgment of the court of the first instance, except for the decision of the court of the first instance as follows: Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act; Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act

O Relevant Acts and subordinate statutes shall be added to "attached Form 1" at the end of this judgment, and shall be governed by the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes.

O 3 'The Judgment' has been made as follows.

Article 97-2 (1) of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act (amended by Act No. 921, Jan. 1, 2010; hereinafter the same shall apply) provides that where a resident prescribed by Presidential Decree leases a national house (including land not exceeding twice the total floor area of the relevant building) falling under any of the following subparagraphs for five years or more, the Plaintiff shall be exempted from transfer income tax on the income accruing from the transfer of the relevant house (hereafter in this Article referred to as "advance rental house") by 80/100 or more (the transfer by December 31, 209) (the "resident prescribed by Presidential Decree" shall be exempted from transfer of the relevant house) by failing to satisfy the requirements for reduction or exemption under Article 97-2 (1) of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act (referring to a newly-built rental house under Article 97-2 (1) of the Act; hereafter in this Article, the same shall apply) and the head of the competent tax office having jurisdiction over the rental business under Article 97-2 (1) of the Rental Housing Act).

2. Conclusion

Since the judgment of the first instance is justifiable, the appeal filed by the plaintiff is dismissed.