Seoul Administrative Court 201Gudan16875 ( October 13, 2012)

Cho High Court Decision 2010Du3475 (Law No. 19, 2011)

It is difficult to accept claims that there are different owners of housing in the name of spouse.

A house held under the name of a spouse at the time of the transfer of a house is not subject to any objective evidence that it is difficult to believe the authenticity of the sales contract already transferred or that it was paid the price, and that it was not registered for ownership transfer even after the transfer on the grounds of transfer income tax, etc., and thus, it constitutes two houses for one household.

2012Nu3592 Revocation of imposition of capital gains tax

XX Kim

Samsung Head of Samsung Tax Office

Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2011Gudan16875 decided January 13, 2012

September 18, 2012

October 12, 2012

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 Defendant’s disposition of imposition of capital gains tax of KRW 000 against the Plaintiff on August 3, 2010 is revoked.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The court's reasoning concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except as stated in the following 2.2. Thus, this court's reasoning is cited in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Parts in height:

Part 3, 18, 5, 1, 1, 3, 3, 5, 1, 5, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2,

C. Determination

(1) Facts of recognition

Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 2, 4 through 9, 11, 15 through 17, and 20 (including paper numbers) shall be acknowledged as follows in full view of the purport of the whole pleadings:

[1]

0 Since the registration of transfer of ownership was completed in the name of the Plaintiff’s wife on August 4, 1988, the instant 2 house was registered in the name of thisA until now.

0. Since the marriage with the Plaintiff around 1993, 00.4. 24. 1997, 000 after the marriage, 00. 7. 20. 1. 1998, thisA was issued a certificate of personal seal impression and a certified copy of resident registration for real estate sale.

[2]

On January 24, 2000, EB, a partner of EB, acquired ownership as a successful bid for a compulsory auction on the land and its above-ground housing site from Pyeongtaek-dong 000-35, and on September 17, 2001, thisB acquired the ownership of heading XXK apartment No. 0000, 000, Jung-gu, Daejeon.

0 The second house of this case was leased to the newF on January 4, 2007, and the lease contract is written as the lessor's 'BB on behalf of the lessor', and as a special contract, the contract and management are written as 'B on behalf of the lessor'.

(2) Determination

In full view of the above facts admitted and the purport of the whole arguments, the plaintiff's assertion is examined as follows.

① In light of the fact that thisA’s seal impression and resident registration certificate for real estate sale on July 20, 1998, which had been issued on July 20, 1998, after thisA had moved abroad, the two houses of this case were sold and purchased between thisA and thisB, and the two houses were affixed on July 20, 1998, and that thisA’s seal affixed on the same day as that for real estate sale (Evidence A No. 7) was affixed on the real estate sales contract (Evidence No. 8) was not deemed identical, it is difficult to view the above real estate sales contract as being drafted on July 20, 1998.

2. Although thisA has sold this case’s second house to thisB and the proceeds therefrom would substitute for KRW 000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000

③ Under the Housing Lease Agreement (Evidence No. 11), this case’s housing lease agreement (Evidence No. 11), wherein this case’s housing lease agreement entered as the lessor, and this case’s housing management is indicated as the agent of this case’s housing management. This case’s housing management or sale by delegation to thisB, may have been issued with a certificate of personal seal impression and resident registration for real estate sale prior to July 20, 198, when entrusting this case’s housing management or sale to thisB.

④ In light of the fact that on January 24, 200, 200, the wife of thisB acquired Pyeongtaek-si under its own name for ECE, his father, and thisB acquired the ownership of 000-35 Dong-dong, Daejeon-dong, Daejeon-dong, KK Apartment No. 0000, 000, etc. on September 17, 2001, it is difficult to accept the statement that this BB acquired the instant second house from thisA on July 20, 198, and did not register the ownership transfer of the instant second house on the ground of transfer income tax, etc.

⑤ In full view of the above circumstances, it is insufficient to recognize that thisA sold the instant house No. 2 to thisB and received the payment of the price in full solely on the ground that thisA was issued with a certificate of personal seal impression and resident registration for real estate sale on July 20, 1998, and there is no other evidence to support this. The Plaintiff’s above assertion is without merit.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion, and it is so decided as per Disposition.