Suwon District Court 201Gudan2680 (2012.03)

Early High Court Decision 201J 1512 (Law No. 207. 20)

Where no appraisal value exists at the time of taxation, it is not necessarily required to undergo a retroactive appraisal.

In cases where there exists the appraisal value at the time of taxation, the said appraisal value may be recognized as the acquisition value. However, in cases where there is no such appraisal value, it is not always necessary to make a retroactive appraisal and to recognize the average value as the acquisition value, and thus, a disposition that calculated capital gains tax based on

2012Nu30785 Revocation of Disposition of Imposing capital gains tax

LAA

Head of Namyang District Tax Office

District Court Decision 2011Gudan2680 Decided September 3, 2012

March 7, 2013

April 4, 2013

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 defendant shall revoke the disposition of imposition of capital gains tax of KRW 000 on January 10, 201 against the plaintiff on January 10, 201.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

This court's decision is based on Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Litigation Act, except for the addition of the judgment of the plaintiff as to the new argument in the appellate court, and it is cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Litigation Act.

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion

A. The plaintiff's assertion

Where there is no transaction example or transaction example to recognize the acquisition value of the land of this case as the acquisition value of the land of this case, the plaintiff had two or more appraisal corporations appraise the market price of the land of this case on June 3, 2003 as the base date in accordance with the exchange contract with the formerB, and then recognize the average amount as the acquisition value of the land of this case.

B. Relevant statutes

Attached Form 3: See the entry of the original text of the relevant statutes.

Article 114 (7) of the former Income Tax Act (amended by Act No. 9897 of Dec. 31, 2009) (amended by Act No. 9897 of Dec. 31, 2009) where the acquisition value is based on the actual transaction value and where it is impossible to recognize or confirm the actual transaction value at the time of acquisition by books or other documentary evidence due to the reasons prescribed by the Presidential Decree, the acquisition value shall be

Article 176-2 (3) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 21301 of Feb. 4, 2009, hereinafter the same shall apply) provides that "where the acquisition value is estimated, determined or revised by estimation pursuant to Article 114 (7) of the Act, it shall be calculated by applying each of the following methods in sequential order, and where there is an example of sale of assets having the identity or similarity of the relevant assets within three months before or after the date of acquisition, it shall be the value, and where there is an appraisal value which is deemed reliable and deemed to have been evaluated by two or more appraisal corporations within three months before or after the date of acquisition (limited to where the appraisal date is within three months after the date of acquisition, respectively, the average value of such appraisal value, and where there is no appraisal value before or after the date of acquisition, it shall be determined that there is an appraisal value before or after the date of acquisition under Article 176-2 (3) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act."

3. Conclusion

If so, the judgment of the first instance is justifiable, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is groundless.