logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 1989. 3. 28. 선고 88누5235 판결
[재산세등부과처분취소][공1989.5.15.(848),695]
Main Issues

The meaning of the land attached to a house as provided in Article 142 (1) 1 (1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act.

Summary of Judgment

The land attached to a house as stipulated in Article 142 (1) 1 (1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act refers to the land attached to the house, unless there are special circumstances, the owner of the house acquires the ownership of the land or the right to use the land, and grants it for the use of the house.

[Reference Provisions]

Article 188 (1) 1 (i) of the Local Tax Act, Article 142 (1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act

Plaintiff-Appellee

Plaintiff 1 and two others, Attorneys Kim Chang-hoon, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant

Defendant-Appellant

The head of Seongbuk-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government

Judgment of the lower court

Seoul High Court Decision 87Gu1138 delivered on March 23, 1988

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

Reasons

The defendant's grounds of appeal are examined.

Article 18 (1) 1 (i) of the Local Tax Act provides that the property tax on the above residential land except for the case of a farm household shall be divided into 30 square meters or less and 1,650 square meters or more, and the total amount calculated by applying the progressive tax rate of 3/1,00 to 70/1,00 shall be the tax amount. Article 18 (3) of the same Act provides that the property subject to taxation under paragraph (1) shall be set by the Presidential Decree. Article 142 (1) 1 (i) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act provides that the land of this case shall be the land annexed to one house. The land annexed to one house of this case shall be deemed to be illegal if it is found that the land of this case was owned by the plaintiff 1,30 square meters or less, and the land of this case shall be deemed to be owned by the plaintiff 2 and the land of this case, which was owned by the plaintiff 1, 300 square meters or less among the previous land owned by the plaintiff 1, respectively.

The issue is groundless.

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 Lee Chang-chul (Presiding Justice)

arrow