beta
(영문) 서울고등법원 2007. 10. 26. 선고 2007누971 판결

아파트 주민을 상대로 한 헬스클럽이 과세대상 업종에 해당하는지 여부[일부패소]

Title

Whether a health club for apartment residents constitutes a type of business subject to taxation.

Summary

Tax and tax exemption are not determined according to the location and location of the place of business, but the supply of services is the case where the user uses facilities, places, sports equipment, etc. for the purpose of training the physical strength of the user and receives the price for the provision of services.

Related statutes

Article 21 of the Value-Added Tax Act

Text

1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

A. The Defendant’s disposition of imposition of global income tax of KRW 1,892,320 for the Plaintiff on October 6, 2005, exceeding KRW 201,240,000, shall be revoked.

B. The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.

2. 85% of the total litigation costs shall be borne by the Plaintiff, and the remainder by the Defendant, respectively.

Purport of claim and appeal

The Defendant’s imposition of value-added tax of KRW 604,00 for 203 against the Plaintiff on October 6, 2005, value-added tax of KRW 3,467,00 for 1 year 2004, value-added tax of KRW 3,467,00 for 2 year 2004, value-added tax of KRW 3,467,00 for 1 year 2004, value-added tax of KRW 3,198,00 for 1 year 2005, global income tax of KRW 1,892,320 for 204 (the amount of tax stated in the amendment of KRW 1,972,690 for September 25, 2006) shall be revoked, respectively.

Reasons

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasons for the court's reasoning for this case are as follows: "86,962 won" in Part 10 of Part 2 of the judgment of the court of the first instance shall be "230,827 won"; "The tax base and tax amount of global income tax for 2003 years out of the initial disposition according to the review decision" shall be reduced in full; the tax base of global income tax for 2004 shall be reduced in 15,959,390 won in 1,972,69,690 won in addition to the personal deduction for 2,000 won for the two family members of the plaintiff; and "the tax base of global income tax for 204 years shall be reduced in 13,49,390 won in 1,892,320 won in the second part of the judgment of the court of the second instance shall be reduced in the amount of value-added tax for 208 years other than the amount of value-added tax for 208 years in the first 206."

2. Parts in height:

(1) As to value-added tax

The issue of taxation and exemption under the Value-Added Tax Act is not determined by the location and place of business, but by the type of business and the type of business. In full view of the provisions of Articles 1 and 7 of the Value-Added Tax Act, the business place of this case is the supply of services that are subject to value-added tax, since the use of facilities, places, sports equipment, etc. or the provision of services incidental thereto for the purpose of the user's physical training, etc. is the supply of services that are subject to value

(2) As to the global income tax portion

First, as seen above, ○○○○’s assertion that the Plaintiff had been in charge of cleaning the workplace of this case as to the personnel expenses for ○○○○○ was a woman of the Plaintiff’s head. In view of the overall purport of the pleadings and the entire purport of the pleadings on the statement of evidence Nos. 18-1 through 12, evidence Nos. 21-1, and witness testimony of the party in question, it can be recognized that ○○○○ was working as management and cleaning personnel at the workplace of this case from Nov. 1, 2003 to Dec. 2, 2004 while serving as management and cleaning personnel at the workplace of this case from Nov. 1, 2003 to Dec. 2, 2004, it is insufficient to recognize the above facts, and it is difficult to support the personnel expenses for ○○○○ as the necessary expenses on the sole basis of evidence No. 4.

Next, according to the records of Eul evidence No. 3-2 on the family deduction part, the defendant can recognize the fact that the defendant has determined the global income tax by making additional family deduction for the plaintiff's spouse and children according to the review by the National Tax Service. Thus, this part of the plaintiff's assertion is without merit.

(3) Calculation of a reasonable global income tax

When calculating global income tax in the year 2004 by deeming the personnel expenses on ○○○ as necessary expenses, the Plaintiff shall be 201,240 won as follows.

Revenue amount

65,070,000

Global income amount;

5,559,390 won

Income Deduction

3,600,000 won

Tax Base

1,959,390 won

Tax Rate

9%

calculated tax amount

176,345 won

Additional Tax

24,902 won

Total determined tax amount

201,247 won

Therefore, the part exceeding KRW 201,240 of the additional disposition of KRW 1,892,320, which belongs to the year 2004 against the Plaintiff on October 6, 2005 should be revoked as it is unlawful.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified within the scope of the above recognition, and the remaining claim is dismissed as it is without merit. Since the judgment of the court of first instance is unfair with some different conclusions, it is reasonable to accept part of the plaintiff's appeal and modify the judgment of the court of first instance as ordered.