2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by each party.

On September 1, 2001, the Defendant’s statement “(i) tax disposition amount” in the attached list “(i) tax disposition amount” as stated in the attached list(i) of taxation disposition is revoked.

2. Purport of appeal

The purport of the Plaintiff’s appeal: The part against the Plaintiff in the judgment of the first instance court shall be revoked. On September 1, 2001, the Defendant, as stated in the list “(i) the amount of imposition of value-added tax” in the attached Table “(ii) the amount of the Plaintiff’s claim for revocation” in the same list, shall be revoked.

The purport of appeal by the defendant: The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance is revoked. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

The reasoning for a member to explain the instant case is as follows, except for the addition of the following judgments with respect to the matters newly asserted by the Plaintiff at the trial, and thus, the reasoning for the first instance judgment is cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Additional matters to be determined;

A. The plaintiff's assertion

(1) First, the Plaintiff constitutes “retailer” or “social service business and personal service business entity,” which is a business entity that is exempt from the duty to issue a tax invoice in lieu of a tax invoice or is exempted from issuing a receipt instead of a tax invoice, or constitutes “business entity that is either impossible or substantially difficult to issue a tax invoice” in light of the nature of the client, content, level of fees, method of application for advertisement, and client’s character, etc. Therefore, the Defendant’s imposition of the instant penalty tax against the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff did not issue

(2) Next, there is a justifiable reason not to mislead the Plaintiff into the Plaintiff’s breach of duty, such as where the advertising client did not want to issue a tax invoice or did not deliver a tax invoice because he did not know his personal status.

B. Relevant statutes

Attached Form is as shown in the attached Form.

C. Determination

(1) Article 1(3) of the Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act provides that “The classification of the business that supplies goods shall be based on the Korean Standard Industrial Classification Table as of the start date of the pertinent taxable period publicly notified by the Commissioner of the Statistics Korea.” According to the Korean Standard Industrial Classification Table as of the start date of the taxable period, advertising business operated by the Plaintiff as a substantial business entity shall be deemed to constitute “business service business”

In addition, in the case of advertising business, it is difficult to regard the "other businesses similar to those under subparagraphs 1 through 8" under Article 25-2 subparagraph 8 of the former Enforcement Rule of the Value-Added Tax Act (amended by Ordinance of the Ministry of Strategy and Finance No. 193 of Apr. 03, 2001) as the "business similar to those under subparagraphs 1 through 8". In addition, most of the advertisement clients are individuals who are not the advertisement clients and are not the advertisement clients, and the advertisement fees are mostly small amount, and the advertisement fees are merely small amount, and most of the advertisement applications are made through telephone, it cannot be deemed that the plaintiff is either impossible

(2) In light of the fact that the advertising requester did not want to issue a tax invoice or did not know his identity and thus, the Plaintiff was unable to identify the client’s resident registration number, etc. to be entered in the tax invoice, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Thus, this part of the claim is without merit.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the judgment of the first instance is legitimate, and all appeals by the plaintiff and the defendant are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.

[Attachment Table of Taxation]

Judges Lee Sung-ho (Presiding Judge)