지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
논문 기본 정보
- 자료유형
- 학술저널
- 저자정보
- 저널정보
- 한국세법학회 조세법연구 租稅法硏究 第28輯 第3號
- 발행연도
- 2022.11
- 수록면
- 71 - 137 (67page)
- DOI
- 10.16974/stlr.2022.28.3.002
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
The Supreme Court has long held that, in the process of a voluntary auction of real estate owned by the person who has pledged his/her property to secure third party’s obligation(“The Person”), the person has been firmly liable to pay capital tax insofar as the purchase price was actually paid by the buyer. Therefore, even though the person’s indemnity claim towards third party became irrevocable, the subsequent claim for already paid capital gain tax rectification is not allowed
① However, in view of the fact that an auction has the nature of both a private sale and public disposal act, it is pretty much obvious that the person can not be treated the same as a seller in the genuine sense in the private sector. Therefore in a voluntary auction, indemnity claim should be the cause of the person’s capital gain, not the purchase price
② In order to deem a "claim for reimbursement" as a claim that caused the "transfer income" of the person, the act of transferring real estate and the act of accruing the claim for reimbursement must be related；and considering the relevant provisions of the Civil Act, there is a close relationship between claim for reimbursement and transferring real estate. This is also confirmed by the fact that, from the perspective of economic substance taxation, the claim for return of embezzled money against the principal"s agent or the nominal trustor"s claim for return of unjust enrichment against the nominal trustee are also related to "business income" or "capital gains."
③ Accepting the Plaintiff"s subsequent claim for capital gain tax rectification, does not result in any inconsistency with the relevant tax law provisions or imbalance in taxation. Rather, if the Plaintiff"s ubsequent claim for capital gain tax rectification is not accepted, there is a possibility of an imbalance in taxation compared to similar cases.
④ Considering the trend of the late 2000s, when the Supreme Court had an synthetic understanding of subsequent claim for capital gain tax rectification system and the theory of maturity and determination of income, it can be interpreted that the very uncertain right of a person who has pledged his/her property to secure another"s obligation to pay another"s debt was recognized as income early on because subsequent claim for capital gain tax rectification is premised on the fact that the claim for reimbursement becomes irrecoverable in the future.
⑤ From the perspective of other concrete reasonableness, it is reasonable to accept the Plaintiff"s claim in the case, considering that the right to request advance reimbursement is not recognized for a person who has pledged his/her property to secure another"s obligation, and that the Plaintiff in the Judgment paid additional capital gains tax on the auction price, which is twice as high as the purchase price under the sale and purchase agreement it signed.
① However, in view of the fact that an auction has the nature of both a private sale and public disposal act, it is pretty much obvious that the person can not be treated the same as a seller in the genuine sense in the private sector. Therefore in a voluntary auction, indemnity claim should be the cause of the person’s capital gain, not the purchase price
② In order to deem a "claim for reimbursement" as a claim that caused the "transfer income" of the person, the act of transferring real estate and the act of accruing the claim for reimbursement must be related；and considering the relevant provisions of the Civil Act, there is a close relationship between claim for reimbursement and transferring real estate. This is also confirmed by the fact that, from the perspective of economic substance taxation, the claim for return of embezzled money against the principal"s agent or the nominal trustor"s claim for return of unjust enrichment against the nominal trustee are also related to "business income" or "capital gains."
③ Accepting the Plaintiff"s subsequent claim for capital gain tax rectification, does not result in any inconsistency with the relevant tax law provisions or imbalance in taxation. Rather, if the Plaintiff"s ubsequent claim for capital gain tax rectification is not accepted, there is a possibility of an imbalance in taxation compared to similar cases.
④ Considering the trend of the late 2000s, when the Supreme Court had an synthetic understanding of subsequent claim for capital gain tax rectification system and the theory of maturity and determination of income, it can be interpreted that the very uncertain right of a person who has pledged his/her property to secure another"s obligation to pay another"s debt was recognized as income early on because subsequent claim for capital gain tax rectification is premised on the fact that the claim for reimbursement becomes irrecoverable in the future.
⑤ From the perspective of other concrete reasonableness, it is reasonable to accept the Plaintiff"s claim in the case, considering that the right to request advance reimbursement is not recognized for a person who has pledged his/her property to secure another"s obligation, and that the Plaintiff in the Judgment paid additional capital gains tax on the auction price, which is twice as high as the purchase price under the sale and purchase agreement it signed.
목차
국문요약
Ⅰ. 대상판결의 사실관계 및 각급 법원의 판단
Ⅱ. 대상판결의 쟁점 및 평석방향
Ⅲ. 대상판결에 대한 비판적 검토
Ⅳ. 글을 맺으며
參考文獻
Abstract
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
파산절차 중 발생한 양도소득 취급에 대한 실무상 문제
회생법학
2021 .12
-
과세관청의 조세포탈범을 상대로 한 민사상 불법행위 손해배상청구 가부 - 대법원 2021. 10. 28. 선고 2019다293814 판결을 중심으로 -
법학평론
2023 .04
-
매매대금 사후 감액을 사유로 한 취득세 경정청구에 관한 판결의 비판적 검토－대법원 2018.9.13. 선고 2015두57345 판결을 중심으로－
세무학연구
2019 .01
-
양도소득세 가산세 개선방안에 관한 연구 : 환산취득가액을 중심으로
국제회계연구
2020 .04
-
제조방법이 기재된 물건 청구항(제법기재물건 청구항)의 해석 - 대법원 2019후11541 판결을 중심으로 -
과학기술과 법
2023 .06
-
부동산 가격안정을 위한 과세제도 개선방안
경영교육연구
2022 .04
-
2018년도 지방세 판례회고
조세연구
2019 .03
-
담보권실행의 경매와 청구금액의 확장 - 특히 부동산과 채권을 중심으로 -
인권과 정의
2024 .03
-
상장주식의 양도세제에 관한 연구
회계저널
2016 .01
-
아파트의 조세부담과 거래량 간의 관계에 대한 실증연구
세무와 회계연구
2019 .07
-
비주거용 건물의 기준시가 결정요인에 대한 실증분석
주거환경
2016 .03
-
파생상품 양도소득세 도입과 세율인상이 시장의 유동성과 변동성에 미치는 영향 ― KOSPI200 선물시장을 중심으로 ―
세무와 회계연구
2022 .05
-
양도소득세 예정신고와 확정신고에 관한 소고-대법원 2021. 12. 30. 선고 2017두73297 판결을 중심으로-
조세논총
2023 .06
-
채권양도 후 채권발생 원인계약의 해제와 원상회복의무 - 대법원 2003. 1. 24.선고 2000다22850판결 -
법학연구
2021 .12
-
부동산 경매에 있어서 채권의 우선순위와 배당의 관계
법학연구
2016 .01
-
한일 청구권 협정은 무엇을 다루었나
인권과 정의
2019 .01
-
주택 관련 종합부동산세의 문제점과 개선방안에 대한 연구
세무와 회계연구
2022 .08
-
우리나라 양도소득세 개선에 관한 연구
기업경영리뷰
2017 .01
-
2016년 조세판례 회고
조세논총
2017 .01
-
집합채권양도담보에 관한 약간의 고찰
법학연구
2022 .08
이 논문의 저자 정보
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2023-329-000235065