취득세 과세원인으로서 도시개발사업의 환지와 도시정비사업의 관리처분계획·이전고시의 비교 고찰

도시개발 환지와 도시정비사업의 취득세 과세 시점을 비교했다.

This paper undertakes a comparative analysis of land readjustment under the Urban Development Act and the management and disposition plan and transfer notification under the Urban Renewal Act as taxable events for acquisition tax. Although land readjustment in the Urban Development Act originates as a doctrinal concept in administrative law, it is difficult to regard the system of land readjustment in urban development projects as a direct transplantation of that concept. From the substantive perspective of the project, members of an association acquire new parcels of land through the urban development project—parcels that differ in location, size, land category, and use.

In effect, the association members obtain new land with an increased value, which gives rise to their ability to pay taxes;accordingly, a taxable event for acquisition tax is deemed to occur. By contrast, the management and disposition plan and transfer notification under the Urban Renewal Act do not vest the association with the authority to secure ownership of the members’ real property and to manage or dispose of it. In redevelopment projects under the Urban Renewal Act, the method of land readjustment is applied mutatis mutandis, and thus the association may exercise public-law authority under the theory of land readjustment.

However, in reconstruction projects under the same Act, no such provision applies. This explains why, even prior to the enactment of the Urban Renewal Act, the practice of acquiring real property ownership from association members through a trust arrangement has continued to this day. In reconstruction projects carried out through trust registration, unlike the method of land readjustment, ownership of the members’ property is transferred to the association, thereby creating a taxable event not only for the members but also for the association itself.

Under the Local Tax Act, based on the trust taxation theory, when association members transfer real property to the association in trust for the purpose of reconstruction, or when members receive allocation of real property from the association after transfer notification, such transactions are legislatively exempted from taxation. In contrast, where the association acquires real property from its members for the purpose of disposal to non-members, taxation applies. Thus, although urban development, redevelopment, and reconstruction projects share certain common principles of taxation, they also exhibit divergent features depending on the nature of each project.

Through its amendment of March 2023, the Local Tax Act clarified the taxable events and taxable objects by reconfiguring, in tax law terms, the public-law concepts adopted in each project. This amendment is meaningful in that it does not rely on abstract administrative-law concepts but instead reflects the unique logic of acquisition tax, which captures the transfer of economic resources as an indicator of tax capacity, in establishing the direction of taxation. Nevertheless, the Local Tax Act does not provide a complete regulation concerning the timing of land acquisition and the calculation of taxable area in reconstruction projects.

In Case 2023Du58435, the court addressed the issues of acquisition timing and taxable area of land allocated for non members in a reconstruction association by invoking principles such as the prohibition of double taxation. However, resolving such matters solely through interpretive doctrines like the prohibition of double taxation is inherently limited. Accordingly, legislative refinement in this respect is necessary.