In light of the fact that it is difficult to readily conclude that the amount entered in receipts, etc. was actually paid on the relevant date, etc.

In light of the fact that it is difficult to readily conclude that the amount entered in receipts, etc. was actually paid on the relevant date, etc.

2013Gudan4778 Disposition of revoking capital gains tax

Hasa

F. F. Head of tax office

October 10, 2014

November 14, 2014

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Cheong-gu Office

The imposition of the capital gains tax of December 1, 2012 imposed on the Plaintiff on December 1, 2012 by the Defendant shall be revoked.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On July 19, 199, the Plaintiff acquired an OO-dong O-dong 71-159 large scale 1,321 square meters (hereinafter “instant site”) on the ground on June 16, 200, and newly constructed 7 stories above the ground and 1,509 square meters below the ground (hereinafter “instant building”). On July 31, 200, the Plaintiff operated a lodging business by newly constructing a 7th floor above the ground and a 1,509 square meters below the ground (hereinafter “the instant building”). On February 4, 2001, the Plaintiff acquired the 71-168 large scale 1,929 square meters above, 71-151 large scale 62 square meters above the same on the same ground on February 17, 2001, and newly constructing the said building site and each of the above accommodation business on the same ground on February 4, 2003.

B. On March 31, 2012, the Plaintiff made a preliminary return on capital gains tax as the actual acquisition value, the actual transfer value, the OOOO, and the capital gains tax OOO, and paid it.

C. On December 1, 2012, the Defendant determined the acquisition value by deeming that the acquisition value of the instant site is unclear among each of the instant real estate transferred on December 1, 2012, and determined the acquisition value by converting it. Of the remodeling construction expenses for the instant building, only the purchase tax invoice receipt (value of supply) among the OOO members of the instant building recognized the necessary expenses, and the remainder was corrected and notified to the Defendant, except for necessary expenses.

D. On August 21, 2013, the Plaintiff filed an objection and filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal. On August 21, 2013, the Tax Tribunal rendered a decision to the effect that the actual acquisition value of the instant land is the transaction value under the sales contract, the expenses actually acquired, and the expenses actually acquired, OOOOwon (OOOOOwon + the registration tax for purchase of local development bonds + OOOOOwon + acquisition tax + OOOOOOwon) by recognizing it as necessary expenses, and that the tax base and tax amount should be corrected on such premise. The Defendant, upon the decision of the Tax Tribunal, partially reduced the acquisition value on October 1, 2013, issued a correction and notice to the Defendant as OOOwon.

Facts that there is no dispute over recognition, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

After entering into a remodeling construction contract with CCC Co., Ltd. on the instant building, the Plaintiff performed remodeling construction works on three occasions in the order from January 2004 to November 2004, between the nine to the first floor, and disbursed construction expenses. However, since CCC’s situation only received OO(supply price) as purchase tax invoice, the Plaintiff should calculate capital gains tax on the part of OOO(supply price) as necessary expenses. Therefore, the Defendant’s disposition that did not recognize the aforementioned OOO as necessary expenses is unlawful.

B. Determination

1) In full view of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, Eul evidence Nos. 3 and 4 (including the number of each branch number), witness KimD's partial testimony, and the whole purport of the pleadings, the following facts can be acknowledged.

A) The Plaintiff entered into a construction contract with CCC Co., Ltd. on three occasions as follows.

The date of conclusion

Construction Name and Construction Period

Process

Method of payment of price

January 13, 2004

EE hotel rooftop 9,8,7 remodeling (from January 15, 2004 to February 11, 2004)

Contract deposit

OOOE

50% of the completion of works, or of other works

OOOE

Upon completion of the entire project

OOOE

After one month of use

OOOE

Sub-committees

OOOE

February 16, 2004

EE hotel 6 and 5 stories (from February 17, 2004 to March 14, 2004)

Contract deposit

OOOE

50% of the completion of works, or of other works

OOOE

Upon completion of the entire project

OOOE

After one month of use

OOOE

Sub-committees

OOOE

April 14, 2004

EE hotel 3, 2, and 1st floor remodeling (from April 13, 2004 to May 20, 2004)

Contract deposit

OOOE

50% of the completion of works, or of other works

OOOE

Upon completion of the entire project

OOOE

After one month of use

OOOE

Sub-committees

OOOE

Additional Construction Costs

1, 2, 3 others

OOOE

Total

OOOE

B) Among the payment methods attached to the end of each of the above contracts, the following are stated in the remarks column:

○○ EE hotel rooftop 9, 8, and 7 contracts for remodeling construction works on January 19, 2004, OOOOO on February 3, 2004, OOOO directors on February 4, 2004, OOO directors on February 18, 2004, OOO directors on February 18, 2004, and on March 23, 2004 (OOO directors if combined)

○○ ECE hotel 6 and 5 stories with respect to the contract for remodeling construction works on February 23, 2004, OOOOO won on March 14, 2004, OOOOO won on March 14, 2004, OOOO directors on March 17, 2004, OOO directors on March 21, 2004, OOO directors on March 21, 2004, OOO directors on March 21, 2004, OO directors on April 21, 2004, OO directors on April 9, 2004, OO directors on April 16, 2004, OO directors on May 21, 2004, and OO directors on May 21, 2004, and O directors if O directors are integrated.

○○ EE hotel 3, 2, and 1st floor in relation to the contract for remodeling construction works on April 23, 2004, OOOO directors on May 11, 2004, OO directors on June 2, 2004, OO directors on June 2, 2004, OO directors on June 2, 2004, OO directors on June 8, 2004, OO directors on July 1, 2004 (OO directors if they are combined), OO directors on July 18, 2004, OO directors on September 18, 2004, OO directors on September 24, 2004, OO directors on November 14, 2004, and O directors on additional construction expenses if they are added.

C) The Plaintiff submitted a receipt-free deposit account, etc. as follows, as evidence of the construction cost.

On January 19, 2004, the Plaintiff submitted a receipt (CCC representative director thisGG) to the effect that the Plaintiff received OOOO on March 23, 2004 in relation to the construction contract for remodeling construction works for 9, 8, and 7 stories on the EE hotel rooftop rooftop, and submitted a receipt stating the details of remitting OOOG to the representative director of the CCC corporation and thisG on February 18, 2004.

On March 23, 2004, the Plaintiff submitted a receipt to the effect that the Plaintiff received an OOO (a contract deposit and a part of a progress payment) in relation to the EE hotel 6 and 5th floor remodeling construction contract, and submitted a receipt to the effect that the OOO was deposited on April 16, 2004, and that the receipt was received on May 21, 2004.

On June 2, 2004, in relation to the contract for non-subcontracted construction works on the 3, 2, and 1st floor of EE hotel, each of the invoices containing each transfer of OOOOO or OOOOOOO on June 8, 2004, and on July 1, 2004, each of the transfer certificates containing the account transfer certificates containing each of the details that OOOOOOO was transferred.

On September 24, 2004 and November 4, 2004, the Plaintiff submitted a receipt to the effect that the Plaintiff was paid KRW OOO on September 24, 2004 regarding additional construction costs for the ESE hotel remodeling project.

D) On March 26, 2004, the Specialized Construction Mutual Aid Association set the coverage amount as the KRW OOO for the KRW OOO on April 7, 2004, set the coverage amount as the KRW OOO for the KRW OO on April 7, 2004, and set the coverage amount as the KRW OOO for the KRW OOO on May 27, 2004.

E) Of the president of the Account on the instant building, the relevant parts of the construction cost are as follows.

Name of Company: Mate ECE period: January 1, 2004 to December 31, 2004

Date

도요

Changes in the motor vehicle;

Secretary

Balance

month prior to the month

OOOE

10/8

Intetrali CorporationCC (State)

OOOE

OOOE

Francs;

OOOE

Moderns

OOOE

F) According to the standard balance sheet, which is the annexed documents to the Plaintiff’s global income tax return in 2003 and 2004, the value of the instant building as of December 31, 2003, as of December 31, 2003, is written as OOO, and as of December 31, 2004, the value of the instant building’s account book is written as OOO.

2) Considering the above facts and the overall purport of the evidence and arguments as stated above, if we examine the following circumstances, namely, CCC corporation issues a tax invoice with regard to each of the above construction contracts to the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff appropriated the amount of "OO" to the director of the account of the building in this case as necessary expenses, and entered it into the account. The Plaintiff's standard balance sheet as of December 31, 2003 and the standard balance sheet as of December 31, 2004 shows that the book value of the building in this case increases the amount of OOO's book value as stated above. According to the above facts, if it is difficult for the Plaintiff to conclude that the amount of the above OO's receipts or receipts as necessary expenses were stated in the OO's remarks column, it is difficult for each of the above O to conclude that the amount of the above OO's receipts or receipts were paid as additional expenses, and it is difficult for the Plaintiff to claim that the OO was paid as additional expenses for the construction works.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.