Chuncheon District Court-2016-Gu Partnership-50288 ( November 10, 2017)

Even if a transferor under a sales contract makes an unregistered pre-sale, there is a tax liability, except in extenuating circumstances.

If the objective meaning of the language and text is clear, barring any special circumstance, the existence and content of the expression of intent should be recognized. Therefore, even if the transferor is not in a state of non-registration under the sales contract, a capital gains tax obligor

(Chuncheon)Revocation of disposition of revocation of imposition of capital gains tax

Since each purchase and sale of land does not constitute an unregistered pre-sale, the Plaintiff’s above note.

The head of the office shall not have reasons.

3. Conclusion

If so, the plaintiff's claim shall be dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance shall conclude this conclusion.

Since the plaintiff's appeal is legitimate, it is dismissed as it is without merit, and it is so ordered as per Disposition.

partnership.

ConversionA

○ Head of tax office

Chuncheon District Court Decision 2016Guhap50288 Decided November 10, 2017

on October 28, 2018

on October 14, 2018

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 transfer income tax reverted to the Plaintiff in November 3, 2014, which belongs to the Plaintiff in 2011.

The imposition of KRW 189,615,230 shall be revoked.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasons for this court are as follows: (a) the "Tax Tribunal" in the last sentence of Article 2 of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be dismissed to the "Tax Tribunal"; (b) the "10 million won" in the 8th sentence shall be added to the " Park○" in the 7th sentence; (c) the "10 million won" in the 10th sentence shall be read as the "15 million won"; and (d) the additional determination of the plaintiff's additional arguments shall be as stated in the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance except where the plaintiff added in paragraph (2) below. Thus, they shall be cited as it is in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act

2. The plaintiff's additional assertion and judgment on appeal

A. The plaintiff's assertion

Since each land of this case as farmland cannot be issued with the qualification certificate for acquisition of farmland, the Plaintiff did not have the intent or ability to acquire ownership of each land of this case. Therefore, since the Plaintiff cannot be deemed to purchase each land of this case, the sale and purchase of each land of this case is not unregistered.

B. Determination

The qualification certificate for acquisition of farmland under Article 8(1) of the Farmland Act is a document to be attached when a person who acquired farmland applies for a registration of ownership, and is merely a document to prove that the person who acquired farmland has the qualification for acquisition of farmland, not a requirement which generates the effect of a juristic act which causes the acquisition of farmland (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Da59871, Jan. 27, 2006). In the meantime, the reason for the assertion that the Plaintiff could not obtain the qualification certificate for acquisition of farmland is merely