The propriety of the disposition in question as to the comprehensive transfer of land is unclear even though the classification by lots is obvious;

Where the non-business land is reported as the actual transaction price among the land transferred after transferring the land of several lots en bloc, the total transfer value shall be calculated by calculating the transfer value of the non-business land according to the standard market price by parcel at

Article 96 of the Income Tax Act

Article 100 (Calculation of Gains on Transfer of Income Tax Act)

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Cheong-gu Office

The Defendant’s disposition of imposition of KRW 26,458,910 on May 2, 2007 against the Plaintiff of KRW 26,458,910 on the part of the year 2006 (the date of the disposition entered in the complaint seems to be erroneous on May 7, 2007).

1. Details of the disposition;

No.

Indication of Land

Sales contract;

Approval Form Contract

1

The violation of Article 270-3 of the Nam-gu Seoul Metropolitan City 270-3 185 m

gold KRW 390 million

gold KRW 390 million

2

269-5 Large 238m

gold KRW 10 million 20 million

gold KRW 10 million 20 million

3

269-6 Large 106m of square meters

gold KRW 177 million

gold KRW 170 million 70 million

4

Along of the 270-4 23m of the road;

None of the records

gold 6 million won

5

Along of the 270-5 33m of the road;

gold 25 million won

gold 10 million won

6

Along of the 269-8 30m of the road;

None of the records

gold 9 million won

7

Along of 269-7 596 m2

gold KRW 170 million

gold KRW 170 million

8

Along of 269-11 53 m prior to such

gold 18 million won

gold 18 million won

Consolidateds

gold KRW 900 million

gold KRW 900 million

A. (1) On June 2006, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract with the non-party company ○○ (hereinafter referred to as the "non-party company") on each land owned by the Plaintiff as follows: (a) prepared each sales contract (Evidence A No. 1 and Evidence B No. 4) stating each purchase price as specified below (the sales contract (hereinafter referred to as the "sales contract of this case") stating that the date of conclusion of the contract is 2006. The certificate No. 4 (the stamp contract of this case; hereinafter referred to as the "the stamp contract of this case") stating that the date of conclusion of the contract of this case is " September 22, 2006." However, as seen below, it is reasonable to view the date of conclusion of the sales contract as the date of receipt of part of the purchase price around June 2006, 206; and (b) written each land of this case as stated in the table No. 87 "the land of this case" as stated in the table below.

(2) However, with respect to the payment of the purchase price of each of the instant lands, the instant sales contract is to pay the remainder of KRW 90 million within 30 days after the conclusion of the contract, and the remainder of KRW 810 million after the conclusion of the contract. The instant sales contract is to pay the down payment of KRW 250 million after the completion of the approval of the apartment business. The instant approval seal of approval stipulates that the contract amount of KRW 201,338,598 shall be the down payment, and the intermediate payment of KRW 201,338,598 shall be the down payment until September 22, 2006, the remainder of KRW 493,61,402 shall be paid by September 25, 2006

(3) The Plaintiff received KRW 90 million from the non-party company on June 13, 2006, KRW 115 million on June 30, 2006, KRW 201,338,598 on September 22, 2006, and KRW 493,61,402 on September 25, 2006, respectively.

B. Meanwhile, around December 2004, the Plaintiff acquired the instant land in 167,669,700 won from Nonparty ○○○○○, and the instant land in 8,854,400 won from Nonparty ○○○○, respectively, and each of the said land was owned in 28,854,400 won. All of the said land was land for which 2 years elapsed from the date of incorporation into an urban area under the National Land Planning and Utilization Act.

C. On November 17, 2006, the Plaintiff calculated the transfer value as the standard market price and filed a preliminary return of capital gains tax on each of the instant land. On February 2007, the Plaintiff calculated the transfer value as the actual transaction price [i.e., the amount of KRW 188 million (=the amount of KRW 170 million + the amount of KRW 18 million + the amount of KRW 18 million) with respect to the instant land and the instant land] and filed a preliminary return of capital gains tax (revision).

D. After conducting a field investigation on the Plaintiff on February 23, 2007, the Defendant: (a) assessed the transfer value based on the actual transaction price of the land for non-business use; (b) assessed the transfer value based on the actual transaction price; and (c) assessed the total transfer value of each land of this case as the standard market price by parcel as shown below; (d) assessed the transfer value based on the actual transaction price of the land of this case as KRW 262,483,915; (b) assessed the transfer value based on the actual transaction price of the land of this case as KRW 29,014,375; and (c) notified the Plaintiff of the disposition of this case by correcting the transfer income tax of 206, May 2, 2007 as KRW 26,458,910 (the total amount of tax paid, etc. 5,725.028).

No.

Indication of Land

Standard Market Price

Transfer Value

1

The violation of Article 270-3 of the Nam-gu Seoul Metropolitan City 270-3 185 m

gold KRW 10,000,000

gold 331,096,519 won

2

269-5 Large 238m

gold 9,2820,000 won

gold 162,863,693

3

269-6 Large 106m of square meters

gold 3,6040,000 won

gold 63,236,452

4

Along of the 270-4 23m of the road;

gold 7820,000 won

gold 13,721,117 won

5

Along of the 270-5 33m of the road;

gold 1,1220,000 won

gold 19,686,820 won

6

Along of the 269-8 30m of the road;

gold 10.2 million won

gold 17,897,109 won

7

Along of 269-7 596 m2

gold 149,596,000

gold 262,483,915 won

8

Along of 269-11 53 m prior to such

Gold 16,536,00 won

gold 129,014,375 won

Consolidateds

gold 512,932,00 won

gold KRW 900 million

E. The Plaintiff was dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an appeal with the National Tax Tribunal on June 20, 2007. However, the National Tax Tribunal dismissed the appeal on August 23, 2007.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1, 2, 4, 6 through 10 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

Although each of the lands of this case is clearly divided and transferred, the disposition of this case, which is calculated by calculating the transfer value of each of the lands of this case according to the standard market price of each of the lands of this case, is unlawful.

(b) Relevant Acts and subordinate statutes: To be listed in attached Form;

C. Determination

According to the following facts: (7) and (8) among each land of this case, the transfer price shall be calculated based on the actual transaction price, unlike the land for non-business use under the Income Tax Act; (8) the sale contract for each land of this case is not prepared; (1) the payment method is made; (2) the down payment, intermediate payment, and balance is determined based on the total purchase price of each land of this case; and (3) the land category of this case is a road, and the purchase price is paid. In addition, according to the evidence No. 5, the non-party company did not set the unit price by lots according to special standards at the time of entering into the sales contract for each land of this case with the Plaintiff, and prepared the sales contract of this case by setting the value at will; (8) the transfer price of each land of this case and the transfer price of each land of this case is unclear; and (7) the transfer price of each land of this case is calculated based on the standard market price No. 1840, Dec. 14, 2006; and

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and it is so ordered as per Disposition.

shall be ruled.