beta
(영문) 대법원 1984. 7. 10. 선고 84누296 판결

[제2차납세의무자지정처분취소][공1984.9.1.(735),1375]

Main Issues

Whether a person who has obtained only a license for a construction business is the business transferee under Article 41 of the Framework Act on National Taxes (negative)

Summary of Judgment

The secondary tax liability under Article 41 of the Framework Act on National Taxes refers to a person who has comprehensively succeeded to all rights and obligations in relation to the business at each place of business, and if the plaintiff acquires only a license for a simple construction business for sanitation and heating equipment construction business from the non-party company, the plaintiff can not be a person who comprehensively succeeds to all rights and obligations in relation to the business of the non-party company. Therefore, the plaintiff cannot be a business transferee of the non

[Reference Provisions]

Article 41 of the Framework Act on National Taxes

Plaintiff-Appellee

Han Chang Construction Co., Ltd., Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Defendant-Appellant

Head of Yongsan Tax Office

Judgment of the lower court

Seoul High Court Decision 83Gu707 delivered on March 21, 1984

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined.

The secondary tax liability under Article 41 of the Framework Act on National Taxes refers to the person who comprehensively succeeds to all rights and obligations for the business at each place of business. As determined by the court below, if the plaintiff takes over only a license for a simple construction business for sanitary and heating equipment construction business from the Seoul Mechanical Equipment Co., Ltd., the plaintiff cannot be deemed the person who comprehensively succeeds to all rights and obligations for the business of the above non-party company, and therefore the plaintiff cannot be deemed the business transferee of the non-party company. The judgment of the court below to the same purport is just, and there is no error in the misapprehension of the legal principles as to the secondary tax liability transferee,

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 on the bench.

Justices Jeong Tae-tae (Presiding Justice)