Open Decision Ledger · Tax & international taxation
Off-street parking land as accessory land for separate combined property taxation
Supreme Court, June 25, 2026, 2026Du30351 (judgment)
Case name: 재산세등부과처분취소·재산세등부과처분취소·재산세등부과처분취소
Official text on the National Law Information Center
Question
Is land that is a separate parcel under a different registered owner, separated from a shopping mall by a road of some width and used as its off-street parking, 'accessory land to a building' subject to separate combined property taxation under the Local Tax Act?
Holding
It is. 'Accessory land to a building' under Article 106(1)(2)(a) of the Local Tax Act and Article 101(1) of its Enforcement Decree means land used for the building's utility and convenience. Whether a parcel is such land is not settled by whether it is a separate parcel or one parcel, or by whether it was already accessory land at the time of the building permit or was acquired after the building was built; it is judged objectively and as a whole, centred on the land's actual use, its use and method, its position, distance and organic relation to the building, and the degree to which it contributes to the building's utility and convenience, and physical continuity or adhesion with the building is not required. The Court upheld the finding below that the land, used as the mall's off-street parking from its opening to the present, is accessory land to the building.
Summary of the holding, verbatim
위 ‘건축물의 부속토지’에 해당하기 위해 반드시 건축물과 토지가 물리적으로 연속 또는 접착되어 있어야 하는 것은 아니고, 위 토지는 갑 쇼핑몰 개장 당시부터 현재까지 갑 쇼핑몰 노외주차장으로 이용되면서 갑 쇼핑몰 건물의 효용과 편익을 위해 사용되고 있으므로 위 ‘건축물의 부속토지’에 해당한다고 본 원심판단을 수긍한 사례.
Unofficial English translation
In order to correspond to such 'land attached to a building,' it is not necessarily required that the building and the land be physically continuous or adjoining, and the court below's determination that the land corresponds to such 'land attached to a building,' since the land has been used as an outdoor parking lot of Shopping Mall A from the time Shopping Mall A opened to the present and is used for the utility and convenience of the Shopping Mall A building, is affirmed.
Disposition
Dismissed Stated in the decision
상고를 기각한다. 상고비용은 피고가 부담한다.
Unofficial English translation
The appeal is dismissed. The costs of the final appeal shall be borne by the defendant.
Form of the test
Circumstances weighed Stated in the decision
해당 토지의 실질적인 이용현황을 중심으로 해당 토지의 사용 용도와 사용 방법, 건축물과 해당 토지의 위치와 거리 및 유기적 관계, 해당 토지가 건축물의 효용과 편익에 기여하는 정도 등을 종합적으로 고려하여 객관적으로 판단하여야 한다.
Unofficial English translation
The determination must be made objectively, by comprehensively considering the actual state of use of the land, including the purpose and method of use of the land, the location and distance between the building and the land and their organic relationship, and the degree to which the land contributes to the utility and convenience of the building.
Factors
- 해당 토지의 사용 용도와 사용 방법
- 해당 토지의 실질적인 이용현황을 중심으로
- 건축물과 해당 토지의 위치와 거리 및 유기적 관계
- 해당 토지가 건축물의 효용과 편익에 기여하는 정도
Unofficial English translation
• The purpose and method of use of the land
• Centering on the actual state of use of the land
• The location and distance between the building and the land, and their organic relationship
• The degree to which the land contributes to the utility and convenience of the building
Relation to precedent
Follows earlier decisions Stated in the decision
대법원 1997. 3. 25. 선고 96누14753 판결(공1997상, 1243)
Unofficial English translation
Supreme Court Decision 96Nu14753 decided March 25, 1997 (Gong 1997 Sang, 1243)
Decisions referred to
[1] 헌법재판소 2012. 4. 24. 선고 2010헌바405 전원재판부 결정(헌공187, 800) / [2] 대법원 1997. 3. 25. 선고 96누14753 판결(공1997상, 1243)
Burden of proof
Not addressed Not in the decision
Open question and revisit condition
How great a road between the building's site and the land, or how weak the organic relationship, before the land no longer counts as accessory land to the building?
A later Supreme Court decision fixing a threshold for distance or road width would require this entry to be read again. So would an amendment to Article 106(1)(2)(a) of the Local Tax Act or to Article 101 of its Enforcement Decree.
Cross-family AI independent reading & axis check
7 of 8 axes matched GPT-6 Astra (OpenAI, codex CLI) · 2026-10-24
A reader from another model family (GPT-6 Astra), given the official text but not the primary reading, agreed on 7 of the 8 axes; the readings differed on axis 8 (open question and revisit condition).
Axis 8 (Open question and revisit condition): Primary “How great a road between the building's site and the land, or how weak the organic relationship, before the land no longer counts as accessory land to the building?” vs Independent “How should appurtenant status be assessed when a parking lot serves both the building and substantial unrelated uses?”
The primary asks how wide a road or how weak an organic link must be before the land ceases to be accessory land. The independent asks how to assess the case where a parking lot also serves substantial unrelated uses.
위 ‘건축물의 부속토지’에 해당하기 위해 반드시 건축물과 토지가 물리적으로 연속 또는 접착되어 있어야 하는 것은 아니고, 위 토지는 갑 쇼핑몰 개장 당시부터 현재까지 갑 쇼핑몰 노외주차장으로 이용되면서 갑 쇼핑몰 건물의 효용과 편익을 위해 사용되고 있으므로 위 ‘건축물의 부속토지’에 해당한다고 본 원심판단을 수긍한 사례.Raw responses and comparison record: Protocol · Blind readings (JSONL) · Axis comparison (JSONL) · SHA-256 (JSON)
Lower-court contrast & scope of application
Lower-court reading vs. Supreme Court holding
Lower-court context: The Daegu High Court, in its judgment of 23 January 2026 (2025Nu10213, 10214, 10215), first held that the land need not be physically continuous or adjoining the building to count as accessory land. It then found that the land had been used as the mall's off-street parking from the opening to the present, serving the building's utility and convenience, and held that the separate parcel, the different registered owner and the road of some width between the mall and the land did not, on those facts, warrant a different conclusion.
Supreme Court standard: The Supreme Court found no error. Reading the appellate reasons against the related provisions, the settled law and the record, it held that the court below had not misapplied the law on 'accessory land to a building' or made any other error affecting the judgment. It added that the Supreme Court decisions the appellant relied on concerned different circumstances and were not apt, and dismissed the appeal unanimously with appeal costs on the defendant.
Distinguishing conditions
- Land that does not in substance serve the utility and convenience of the building with which it is grouped, since the Court defined accessory land by that use.
- Land outside the area obtained by multiplying the building's floor area by the applicable ratio by land-use zone, which Article 101(1) of the Enforcement Decree sets as the range.
- Land that is not used for the utility and convenience of any building, since the definition turns on such use.
Record verification notes
Trace the land's actual use from the mall's opening to the present and ask what it is used for, how it is used and what it contributes to the building, since that is the centre of the test. Then measure the land's area against the floor area multiplied by the applicable ratio by land-use zone under Article 101(1) of the Enforcement Decree. Lastly, check whether the decisions the other side cites concern this provision and these facts, since the Court held that the decisions cited in the appeal concerned different circumstances and were not apt.
From the official text
Points at issue
[1] 지방세법령에 따른 별도합산과세의 입법 취지 [2] 지방세법 제106조 제1항 제2호 (가)목 및 지방세법 시행령 제101조 제1항 본문 각 호에서의 ‘건축물의 부속토지’의 의미 / 이러한 ‘건축물의 부속토지’에 해당하는지 판단하는 방법 [3] 갑 쇼핑몰 부지와 소유 명의가 다르고 별개의 필지로 되어 있는 갑 쇼핑몰 노외주차장으로 이용되는 토지가 갑 쇼핑몰과 일정 폭의 도로를 사이에 두고 분리되어 있는데, 위 토지가 재산세 별도합산과세대상의 하나로 정하고 있는 ‘건축물의 부속토지’에 해당하는지 문제 된 사안에서, 위 토지는 위 ‘건축물의 부속토지’에 해당한다고 본 원심판단을 수긍한 사례
Unofficial English translation
[1] The legislative purpose of separate aggregated taxation under the Local Tax Act and its Enforcement Decree [2] The meaning of 'land attached to a building' in Article 106 (1) 2 (a) of the Local Tax Act and in each subparagraph of the main sentence of Article 101 (1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act / The method of determining whether such 'land attached to a building' is present [3] In a case where an issue arose as to whether the land used as an outdoor parking lot of Shopping Mall A, which is owned under a name different from that of the site of Shopping Mall A, consists of separate lots, and is separated from Shopping Mall A by a road of a certain width, corresponds to the 'land attached to a building' designated as one of the subjects of separate aggregated taxation for property tax, a case in which the court below's determination that the land corresponds to such 'land attached to a building' is affirmed
Summary of the holding
[1] 지방세법령에 따른 별도합산과세는, 일정한 건축물의 부속토지의 경우 다른 토지의 가액과 합산하여 고율의 누진세율을 적용하는 종합합산과세 방식에 의하게 되면 토지의 정상적인 활용을 지나치게 제약할 우려 및 임대료 인상, 물가인상, 세부담의 전가 등의 문제가 유발될 수 있고, 이를 분리과세하면 건축물의 부속토지를 빙자한 토지의 과다보유 소지가 발생할 수 있는 문제점을 보완하기 위하여 별도로 합산하여 종합합산과세보다 낮은 누진세율을 적용하도록 한 것이다. [2] 지방세법 제106조 제1항 제2호 (가)목, 지방세법 시행령 제101조 제1항의 문언 및 내용과 취지 등을 종합하여 보면, 지방세법 제106조 제1항 제2호 (가)목 및 지방세법 시행령 제101조 제1항 본문 각 호에서의 ‘건축물의 부속토지’는 건축물의 효용과 편익을 위해 사용되고 있는 토지를 의미하고, 이러한 ‘건축물의 부속토지’인지는 해당 토지가 건축물이 서 있는 토지와 별개의 필지인지 아니면 1필지인지 또는 해당 토지가 건축허가 당시부터 부속토지로 되어 있었는지 아니면 건축물이 신축된 이후에 취득한 것인지 등에 의하여만 결정할 것이 아니라, 해당 토지의 실질적인 이용현황을 중심으로 해당 토지의 사용 용도와 사용 방법, 건축물과 해당 토지의 위치와 거리 및 유기적 관계, 해당 토지가 건축물의 효용과 편익에 기여하는 정도 등을 종합적으로 고려하여 객관적으로 판단하여야 한다. [3] 갑 쇼핑몰 부지와 소유 명의가 다르고 별개의 필지로 되어 있는 갑 쇼핑몰 노외주차장으로 이용되는 토지가 갑 쇼핑몰과 일정 폭의 도로를 사이에 두고 분리되어 있는데, 위 토지가 재산세 별도합산과세대상의 하나로 정하고 있는 ‘건축물의 부속토지’에 해당하는지 문제 된 사안에서, 위 ‘건축물의 부속토지’에 해당하기 위해 반드시 건축물과 토지가 물리적으로 연속 또는 접착되어 있어야 하는 것은 아니고, 위 토지는 갑 쇼핑몰 개장 당시부터 현재까지 갑 쇼핑몰 노외주차장으로 이용되면서 갑 쇼핑몰 건물의 효용과 편익을 위해 사용되고 있으므로 위 ‘건축물의 부속토지’에 해당한다고 본 원심판단을 수긍한 사례.
Order
상고를 기각한다. 상고비용은 피고가 부담한다.
Unofficial English translation
The appeal is dismissed. The costs of the final appeal shall be borne by the defendant.
Provisions referred to
[1] 지방세법 제106조 제1항 제2호, 지방세법 시행령 제101조 / [2] 지방세법 제106조 제1항 제2호 (가)목, 지방세법 시행령 제101조 제1항 / [3] 지방세법 제106조 제1항 제2호 (가)목, 지방세법 시행령 제101조 제1항
Read 2026-10-24 · Cross-read 2026-10-24. All quotes matched against the official text. The Chinese-character placeholders the court used for anonymised parties are given in their Korean readings, and parenthetical Chinese-character glosses are omitted.
Every entry is published only after all quotes have been matched character by character against the official text, and audited by an independent second reading from a different model family across all eight axes. Both agreed axes and text-grounded interpretive divergences are recorded openly. The ledger is a research record, not an assessment of the court or advice on any matter.
Back to the ledger