logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2011. 12. 22. 선고 2011두24767 판결
(심리불속행) 양도 당시 토지등소유자가 사업시행인가를 받은 경우에만 과세특례규정 적용됨[국승]
Case Number of the immediately preceding lawsuit

Seoul High Court 2010Nu42616 (Law No. 23, 2011)

Case Number of the previous trial

Cho High Court Decision 2007No4138 (Law No. 14, 2008)

Title

(Reorder of Hearing) The provision of special taxation shall apply only when the owners of land, etc. have received project authorization at the time of transfer.

Summary

(C) The provisions of special taxation can only be applied to the urban environment rearrangement project implemented by the owners of land, etc. only when real estate has been transferred to the owners of land, etc. who have received project implementation authorization at the time of transfer.

Cases

2011Du24767 Revocation of disposition rejecting capital gains tax rectification

Plaintiff-Appellant

Note AA

Defendant-Appellee

Head of Seodaemun Tax Office

Judgment of the lower court

Seoul High Court Decision 2010Nu42616 Decided September 23, 201

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

Reasons

Although examining the grounds of appeal in comparison with the records of this case and the judgment of the court below, the argument on the grounds of appeal is deemed not to include or not acceptable the grounds stipulated in each subparagraph of Article 4(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure for Appeal. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed and it is so decided as per Disposition

Reference materials.

If the grounds of final appeal are not included in the grounds of final appeal that make it appropriate for the court of final appeal to become a legal trial, such as matters concerning significant violation of Acts and subordinate statutes, etc., the system of trial without continuing the deliberation on the merits of the grounds of final appeal, and refers to the system of dismissal of final appeal by judgment without continuing the deliberation on the merits of the grounds of final appeal (see this case, e.g.,

arrow