Main Issues
The supplementary clause 3 of the Act on Special Measures for the Control of Real Estate Dumping (Act No. 2281) is applicable only to transfer activities after the date of enforcement of the Act, and it is reasonable to interpret that transfer activities before the enforcement of the Act cannot be applied retroactively to transfer activities before the enforcement of the Act.
Summary of Judgment
This paragraph is applicable only to transfer activities after the enforcement date of the amended Act, and it is reasonable to interpret that transfer activities before the enforcement date of the amended Act cannot be applied retroactively.
[Reference Provisions]
Paragraph 3 of the Addenda to the Act on Special Measures for the Suppression of Real Estate
Plaintiff-Appellee
Plaintiff
Defendant-Appellant
Head of North Busan District Tax Office
original decision
Daegu High Court Decision 72 Gu8 delivered on August 30, 1972
Text
We reverse the original judgment.
The case shall be remanded to the Daegu High Court.
Reasons
The grounds of appeal by the defendant performer shall be examined.
The court below held that the court below erred in interpreting the Act on Special Measures for the Control of Real Estate Dumping, which was enforced on January 1, 1968 and the Act on Special Measures for the Control of Real Estate Dumping on or before January 1, 1963, that it is reasonable to interpret that the same tax shall not be imposed even when a person who owned the land before January 1, 1963 transfers the land before the enforcement date of this Act, based on the view that it is reasonable in principle to interpret that the same tax shall not be imposed even when he owns the three lots of land before January 1, 1963 and transferred it before September 10, 1969. However, the court below erred in interpreting the Act on Special Measures for the Control of Real Estate Dumping (Act No. 1972) which was enforced on or after January 1, 1968, which was enforced on or before the enforcement date of this Act (No. 1970 million won prior to the enforcement date of this Act).
Therefore, it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.
[Judgment of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) Nabri-dong and Dobri-Jaking Hanwon