beta
(영문) 부산지방법원 2019. 11. 29. 선고 2019구합21185 판결

원고의 사업이 부가가치세 면세 업종인 직업소개소인지[국승]

Title

Whether the plaintiff's business is value-added tax-free job placement;

Summary

Considering the submitted evidence and witness testimony comprehensively, it is reasonable to view that the service constitutes human resources supply service subject to value-added tax rather than employment brokerage service exempt from value-added tax.

Related statutes

Tax exemption for the following goods or services under Article 26 of the Value-Added Tax Act:

Cases

Busan District Court 2019Guhap21185 Disposition revoking Value-Added Tax Imposition

Plaintiff

Kim 00

Defendant

00. Head of tax office

Conclusion of Pleadings

October 11, 2019

Imposition of Judgment

November 29, 2019

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Cheong-gu Office

The imposition disposition of value-added tax on February 7, 2019 by the defendant against the plaintiff on February 7, 2019 shall be revoked.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On September 15, 2014, the Plaintiff is a person engaging in the job placement business (hereinafter “instant business”) with the trade name of 00,007,07,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,0000,0000,000,000,0000,0000,000,000.

B. On June 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for the operation of the cccc and 'contract for the operation of the ccc and 'contract for the operation of the cc and 'contract for the operation of the cc and 'the c' (hereinafter referred to as the 'first contract') located in 079,00,000,000 Busan. The main contents of the contract are as follows.

Article 4 (Place where Contract Work is Performed)

The place where the contract is conducted may be changed to the hospital of this case through consultation with the cc and the plaintiff.

Article 6 (Employment Relations)

The plaintiff confirms that human resources assigned to the ccc places of business under this contract are human resources directly employed by the plaintiff and that they are not employment relations of ccc. Accordingly, the plaintiff is responsible for the management of employment human resources. However, when there is a nursing staff recommended by cc, the plaintiff may be employed in the places of cc and cc places of business under the agreement of c and the plaintiff.

Article 7 (Direction and Supervision)

The Plaintiff shall take all measures related to the distribution, order, technology, safety, etc. of the contracting business so that the Plaintiff’s employee may not entirely interfere with the work of the cc in performing the contracting business under Article 2. Furthermore, the Plaintiff’s regular direction, management, and supervision must ensure that the contracting business is carried out in the highest quality.

Article 8 (Indemnification)

The physical damage caused by the plaintiff's input personnel to the patient of cc which occurred during the course of the implementation of this contract shall be responsible for and resolved with the liability insurance to which the plaintiff's input personnel are subscribed.

(Compensation liability insurance is to confirm that the Plaintiff is liable for damages even if it was not subscribed to the liability insurance due to the Plaintiff’s intentional act or omission of business by having subscribed to a conditionless contract).

Article 10 (Claims and Payment of Contract Price)

2. As of the end of each month, the Plaintiff shall settle the nursing fees and claim them within six (6) days of the following month, and c shall, upon receipt of such request, pay them within five (5) days from the date of receipt of the request.

C. On June 15, 2016, when the contract period of the first contract of this case expires, the Plaintiff entered into a joint nursing agreement with CC on June 15, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as the "second contract of this case"). The main contents of the contract are as follows (hereinafter referred to as "the contract of this case" and "the second contract of this case", and "the service of this case" under each contract of this case.

Article 1 (General Provisions)

c and the plaintiff agree to introduce joint nursing service in mutual cooperation.

Article 3 (Qualification of Nursing Personnel)

A nursing worker who has completed the prescribed education of the plaintiff and is well-grounded and physically healthy, shall work as a member nursing worker of the plaintiff under the Employment Security Act.

Article 5 (Medical Examination)

1) The Plaintiff should be fully responsible for nursing patients with a healthy body during the nursing service of nursing workers.

Article 6 (Nursing Expenses)

Added

Article 7 (Uniform Conditions)

The plaintiff's nursing room shall wear the same uniforms and whites, and shall maintain the good and uniform uniforms.

Article 10 (Termination of Agreements)

c If it is determined that the plaintiff caused damage to the operation of the patient service failure due to the introduction of human resources in bad faith, the plaintiff may terminate the above contract at the time of delayed payment of nursing fees requested to c not less than twice without good cause.

(Attachment)

The price contract of the hospital of this case

- 기간 : 1년(2016. 6. 15. 〜2017. 6. 14.)

- The fixed amount per nursing officer: 1,700,000 won;

-a fixed amount per ICU nursing officer: 1,730,000 won

-on payment date: 10th of the following month;

-Deposit Account: Plaintiff Aa human resources of deposit account

- Other compensation insurance

-Electronic Accounting Issuance

D. In accordance with each of the instant contracts, the Plaintiff sent the nursing workforce to the instant hospital pursuant to each of the instant contracts, received the entire monthly wage for the entire nursing staff from cC in a lump sum, deducted a certain amount as a fee, and paid it to the nursing staff again.

E. In the course of conducting an integrated investigation into the instant hospital, the head of the Suwon Tax Office discovered that the Plaintiff issued an invoice (tax exemption) in lieu of a tax invoice from 2015 to 2017, even though the Plaintiff engaged in human resources supply business (tax) under each of the instant contracts with CC, and notified the Defendant of the taxation data.

F. The Defendant deemed that the instant service constitutes a human resources supply business that is subject to value-added tax, not an employment brokerage business subject to value-added tax exemption, and imposed value-added tax and additional tax on the Plaintiff on February 7, 2019 (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through Gap evidence 4, Gap evidence 8, Eul evidence 1 (including branch numbers), the purport of whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The Plaintiff merely entered into the instant contract in accordance with the “Contract for Management of Contract Human Resources,” which was used by the same industry in the remaining ccc that did not understand the meaning of the specialized terms due to the lack of experience in job placement services, and actually, the Plaintiff introduced the registered nursing staff to the instant hospital and received nursing expenses from cccc and then deducted the service fees, and delivered them to the nursing staff. Since the Plaintiff did not pay or take a disciplinary measure against the nursing staff members or have subscribed to the 4-party insurance, the Plaintiff’s instant service constitutes an employment brokerage business subject to value-added tax exemption. Accordingly, the instant disposition based on the premise that the instant service falls under the human resources supply business is unlawful.

B. Relevant statutes

Attached Form 3 is as listed in the "relevant Acts and subordinate statutes".

C. Determination

1) Relevant regulations and legal principles

A) Article 26(1)15 of the Value-Added Tax Act stipulates that "one of the objects of value-added tax exemption is "the supply of personal services that a author or any other person prescribed by the Presidential Decree provides vocationally." Article 42 of the Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act provides that "personal services under Article 26(1)15 of the Value-Added Tax Act (including the case where an entrepreneur concurrently operates multiple businesses independently supplies services that are not necessarily incidental to taxable businesses)" refers to any of the following services that are supplied as an independent business (including the case where an entrepreneur concurrently operates multiple businesses independently supplies services that are not necessarily incidental to taxable businesses)," while subparagraph 2(c) provides that "personal services that are provided as independent in return for consideration

B) Meanwhile, Article 4(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act provides that the classification of the business that supplies goods or services shall, in principle, be based on the Korean Standard Industrial Classification publicly announced by the Commissioner of the Korean National Statistical Office. According to the Korean Standard Industrial Classification, the operation of a job placement office belongs to an employment brokerage business, which is a primary industrial activity, to select, arrange, and place human resources on behalf of the employer or job seeker, on behalf of the employer or the job seeker. In this case, job seeker is distinguishable from a job seeker who is not an employee of the employment brokerage business, an employee under his/her own management,

2) In light of the above legal principles, if the Plaintiff’s health care units, Gap evidence Nos. 3 through 5, Gap evidence No. 8, testimony and arguments can be comprehensively taken into account with respect to the above case, namely, ① supply of human resources employed by the Plaintiff to the instant hospital under the direction and supervision of the Plaintiff under the contract for management of human resources, ② renewal of the contract of this case with cc for the purpose of "joint nursing placement contract" for which the Plaintiff would not be liable for damages to the patient's health care unit, and there is no reason to conclude the contract of this case that the Plaintiff would be liable for damages to the patient's health care unit under the premise that the nursing service unit is not a nursing service unit under the premise that the patient's health care unit is not a nursing service unit under the premise that the patient's health care unit is not a nursing service unit under the premise that the patient's health care service unit is not a nursing service unit under the Employment Security Act, and the Plaintiff would still be liable for damages to the patient's health care worker's nursing service unit.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.