Seoul High Court 2010Nu23882 ( December 30, 2010)

Seocho 209west 2118 ( November 06, 2009)

(C) The taxation of two or more houses per household does not go against the principle of retroactive taxation prohibition and the Constitution.

(Main) The amended legal provision is applied at the time of transfer of a house, the taxation requirement of which is completed after the amendment of the Act, and cannot be deemed as contrary to the principle of prohibition of retroactive taxation. The provision excluding special deduction for long-term possession of two or more houses for one household, and the provision of aggravated tax rate cannot be deemed as violating the principle of prohibition of excessive taxation under the Constitution or infringing on the property right guaranteed by the Constitution.

2011Du4565 Revocation of Disposition of Imposing capital gains tax

LAA

○ Head of tax office

Seoul High Court Decision 2010Nu23882 Decided December 30, 2010

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

All of the records of this case and the judgment of the court below and the grounds of appeal were examined, but the grounds of appeal on the grounds of appeal are not included in the grounds provided by each subparagraph of Article 4(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure for Appeal, and the appeal is dismissed pursuant to Article 5 of the same Act. It is so decided as per

Reference materials.

If the grounds of final appeal are not included in the grounds of final appeal that make it appropriate for the court of final appeal to become a legal trial, such as matters concerning significant violation of Acts and subordinate statutes, etc., the system of trial without continuing the deliberation on the merits of the grounds of final appeal, and refers to the system of dismissal of final appeal by judgment without continuing the deliberation on the merits of the grounds of final appeal (see this case, e.g.,