(b) Effect of declaration and determination of taxpayers under the Value-Added Tax Act;

B. Since the Value-Added Tax Act adopts a voluntary declaration system that requires the first determination of tax base and tax amount at the time when the taxpayer files a return, the tax base and tax amount of value-added tax are only the first determination of the taxpayer's return or the final determination of the taxpayer's return is only the first determination of the tax base and tax amount, and since the authority for final determination of the taxpayer's return is reserved to the government, the government can determine or correct the exact tax base and tax amount when there are no returns or there are certain reasons such as errors or omissions in the details of the return, and the person with the right to impose taxes can immediately correct or correct them when there are errors or omissions in

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

With respect to No. 1:

According to the records, the import of goods is the supply of goods to domestic or foreign entrepreneurs. In this case, as the other party to the transaction supplies goods to domestic or foreign entrepreneurs, and the head of customs office collects the value-added tax from domestic or consumers who are importers at the time of customs clearance except for the case where the value-added tax is exempted under the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes. In this case, the imposition of value-added tax by the Daegu customs office against the plaintiffs is the imposition of value-added tax on the "YTT" which is not subject to value-added tax exemption, while the imposition of value-added tax by the plaintiff's correction in this case is the final return of the first period portion of value-added tax in 1984, the plaintiffs are deemed to be entitled to the deduction of the already collected input tax amount for the above imported goods, and the defendant filed the final return of the amount equivalent to the above value-added tax amount as the refund tax amount, and the subsequent return of the value-added tax amount cannot be deemed to constitute the separate imposition of value-added tax under Article 12 (1) 2 of the Value-Added Tax Act.

The decision of the court below to the same purport is just, and there is no error of law such as misunderstanding of legal principles as pointed out.

With respect to the second ground:

Article 17 (2) 4 of the Value-Added Tax Act is applicable to the imported goods of this case, and thus, even if the imposition disposition of value-added tax by the head of Daegu Customs Office is unlawful, the imposition disposition by the head of Daegu Customs Office of this case differs from the refund decision or the imposition disposition of value-added tax by the correction of the defendant of this case. Thus, the illegality of the imposition disposition by the head of Daegu Customs Office of this case should be disputed through a separate lawsuit regardless of actual payment, regardless of actual payment. The imposition disposition by the head of the Daegu Customs Office of this case should not be subject to the application of Article 17 (2) 4 of the Value-Added Tax Act on the ground that the illegal value-added tax was not exempted by the exemption of the exempted input tax amount, or that the amount of the input tax amount should not be deducted from the output tax amount of the input tax amount to be deducted from the

In the case where the value-added tax on the tax-free goods that cannot be imposed is illegally imposed and actually collected, the purport that the input tax amount paid by mistake should be deducted from the output tax amount in the prescribed taxable period by excluding the legitimacy of Article 17 (2) 4 of the Value-Added Tax Act, or that this is merely a critical opinion of the plaintiffs, and thus it cannot be accepted.

With respect to the third point:

As stipulated in Article 22(1) of the Framework Act on National Taxes and Article 10-2 subparag. 1 of the Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act, the E-Added Tax Act adopts a voluntary declaration system that requires the first determination of the tax base and tax amount when the taxpayer files a return. Thus, the tax base and tax amount of value-added tax are only the first determined by the taxpayer’s return, but the final determination of the taxpayer’s return is only the first determination of the tax base and tax amount, and the authority of final determination of the taxpayer is reserved to the government. Thus, if there are no returns or errors or omissions in the details of the return, the government is only able to determine the accurate tax base and tax amount or correct the final determination of the tax base and tax amount or the final determination of tax amount, and if there are errors or omissions in the original or corrected tax base and tax amount or the final determination of tax amount, the final determination of the refund order can be corrected immediately. Thus, even if the Defendant knew that there is an error in the final return of this case, and there is no error in the grounds for appeal.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Lee Jae-hee (Presiding Justice)