Main Issues
Initial Date of extinctive prescription of real estate
Summary of Judgment
In the case of the transfer of real estate, the extinctive prescription of the right to impose and collect the transfer income tax shall proceed from the day following the expiration of the final return period.
[Reference Provisions]
Article 27 of the Framework Act on National Taxes, Article 166 of the Civil Act
Reference Cases
Supreme Court Decision 84Nu572 Delivered on December 26, 1984
Plaintiff-Appellant
Plaintiff
Defendant-Appellee
Head of Dong Daegu Tax Office
Judgment of the lower court
Daegu High Court Decision 84Gu152 delivered on February 22, 1985
Text
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.
Reasons
The plaintiff's grounds of appeal are examined.
According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below determined that the plaintiff purchased the land of this case in 40,275,00 won on October 15, 197 with the non-party 2, the owner of this case, and then did not complete the registration of the transfer of ownership, and transferred the land in 45,493,123 won to the non-party 3 and the non-party 3 and received the full payment of the price until the August of the same year, and rejected the supporting evidence.
In light of the records, the court below's above measures are just and there is no error of law such as misconception of facts against the rules of evidence such as theory of lawsuit, and the statute of limitations of the right to impose and collect national taxes under the Framework Act on National Taxes which was enforced at the time of the transfer of real estate as in the case of the transfer of real estate as in this case. Thus, the court below's purport is just and there is no error of law of misunderstanding of legal principles as to the right to impose and collect transfer income tax, such as theory of lawsuit, and the statute of limitations of the right to collect national taxes, which is enforced at the time of the transfer of the real estate as in this case.
Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and all costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.
Justices Kim Young-ju (Presiding Justice)