[종합소득세부과처분취소][공1998.7.15.(62),1909]
[1] Standard for determining the time of attribution of income under the Income Tax Act
[2] The case holding that the "date of shipment of goods" as to the business of issuing a certificate of sale of goods belongs to the time of income
[1] The right confirmation principle, which is the principle of determining the time of attribution of income under the Income Tax Act, is not the time when the income is realized, but the income for the pertinent year is deemed to have been accrued when the right occurs, and is calculated based on the income for the pertinent year. However, the concept of "determined" in the right confirmation principle is not defined as a general principle that does not include any exception to the time of attribution of income. As to specific matters, the time of attribution should be determined based on whether the possibility of realizing the income is considerably mature and definite, considering the management and control of income, the degree of the objective of income generated, and the timing of securing the taxpayer's fees.
[2] The case holding that a claim for fees for the provision of a certificate of sale of goods has become final and conclusive on the date of shipment, considering the following circumstances: (a) from the date of issuance of the letter of credit following the issuance of the certificate of sale of goods to the date of shipment; (b) the volume of 2,3 months from the date of issuance of the certificate of sale of goods until the date of actual receipt of the fee; and (c) the general nature of the service of the issuance of the certificate of sale of goods; and (b) the general nature of the service of the issuance of the certificate of sale of goods
[1] Articles 28(1) and (3) (see current Article 24(1) and (3)), 51(1) (see current Article 39(1)) of the former Income Tax Act (Amended by Act No. 4281, Dec. 31, 1990); Article 57 of the former Income Tax Act (Amended by Presidential Decree No. 13194, Dec. 31, 1990); Article 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, and 50 of the former Income Tax Act (Amended by Act No. 4281, Dec. 31, 1990; see current Article 24(1) and (3) (see current Article 24(1) and (3)); Article 51(1) (see current Article 39(1)); Article 57 of the former Income Tax Act (Amended by Act No. 13194, Dec. 31, 1990); Article 28(1(3) of the former Income Tax Act (see current Article 4)
[1] Supreme Court Decision 92Nu4048 delivered on July 14, 1992 (Gong1992, 2456), Supreme Court Decision 91Nu8180 delivered on June 22, 1993 (Gong1993Ha, 2172), Supreme Court Decision 96Nu2200 delivered on April 8, 1997 (Gong197Sang, 1477), Supreme Court Decision 96Nu19154 delivered on June 13, 1997 (Gong197Ha, 2077)
Plaintiff
head of Dongjak-gu Tax Office
Seoul High Court Decision 97Gu20177 delivered on November 5, 1997
The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.
We examine the grounds of appeal.
The right confirmation principle, which is the principle of determining the period of attribution of income under the Income Tax Act, is not the time when the income is realized, but the income is deemed to have been generated when the right occurs and the income is calculated for the pertinent year. In substance, the concept of "determined" in the right confirmation principle is not defined as a general principle that does not include any exception to the period of attribution of income. In particular, the time of attribution should be determined on the basis of whether the income is considerably mature and finalized to the extent that there is a high possibility of realizing the income, considering the management and control of income, the degree of the objective of income generated, and the timing of securing the taxpayer's fees, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 91Nu8180, Jun. 22, 1993; 96Nu19154, Jun. 13, 1997).
According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below found that the plaintiff engaged in a service business (issuance of a certificate of sale of goods) from October 20, 197 to February 28, 1990 and provided services for the issuance of a certificate of sale of goods for foreign exporters and received fees from such companies. The court below held that the court below's decision as above is just and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the point of attribution of revenue as discussed above, since the date of issuance of the certificate of sale of goods from the date of issuance of the letter of credit to the date of shipment and the date of actual receipt of fees for not less than 2,3 months, and not less than 9 months, and considering these circumstances and the general nature of the service of the certificate of sale of goods from the date of issuance of the certificate of sale of goods.
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 on the bench.
Justices Final Young-young (Presiding Justice)