Seoul Administrative Court 2009Gudan17110 (2010.08)

Seocho 209west 2150 (Law No. 9.10, 2009)

In the case of simple exchange, it is necessary to make it impossible to verify the actual acquisition value.

In the case of an exchange, in the case of an exchange, the market price appraisal of the object of exchange as a value exchange and accompanied by the procedure for settlement of the difference in the appraisal value, the actual acquisition value may be verified, but in the case of a simple exchange, the actual acquisition value shall not be confirmed.

The contents of the decision shall be the same as attached.

쇠鹬 쇠지鹬 3000 쇠지지지지 3000 지지지지지지지지지 3000

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

1. Purport of claim

The defendant shall revoke the disposition of imposition of capital gains tax of KRW 199,923,410 for the plaintiff on December 11, 2008.

2. Purport of appeal

The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff shall be revoked. The defendant shall revoke on December 11, 2008 the part not exceeding KRW 186,68,317 among the disposition of imposition of capital gains tax of KRW 199,923,410 for the plaintiff on December 11, 2007.

쇠지지지지 3000 지지지지지지 3000 지지지지지지지지지지 3000

1. Scope of the judgment of this court;

On June 8, 2010, the court of first instance requested the cancellation of the disposition stated in the purport of the claim against the defendant on the first island, and on December 11, 2008, the court of first instance rendered a judgment in favor of the plaintiff that exceeds KRW 186,68,317 of the disposition of imposition of capital gains tax of KRW 199,923,410 (hereinafter referred to as "the disposition of this case") for the plaintiff on December 11, 2007. The part of the disposition of imposition of capital gains tax of KRW 186,668,317 (hereinafter referred to as "the disposition of this case") was revoked. The remaining claims of the plaintiff are dismissed. The fact that only the plaintiff appealed against the part against the plaintiff on the disposition of imposition of capital gains tax of KRW 2007 and filed an appeal is clearly stated in the record. Thus, the object of the judgment of this court is limited to the

2. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasoning for the court's explanation concerning this case is as follows: (a) the part on whether the disposition of the court of first instance was lawful on July 23, 1998; (b) the part on whether the disposition of this case does not exceed KRW 186,668,317 of the disposition of this case; (c) the part on the disposition of this case in the first instance in the second instance in the part on which the disposition of this case does not exceed KRW 186,68,317 of the disposition of this case; and (d) the part on July 24, 1998 in the first instance in the part on July 24, 1998 in the judgment of the court of first instance except for the part on July 23, 1998, as stated in the grounds for the judgment of the court of first instance; and (d) this part is cited as it is in accordance with Article

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it does not exceed 186,68,317 won among the plaintiff's claim for revocation of the disposition of this case. Since the judgment of the court of first instance is consistent with this conclusion, the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.