과세처분을 지연하여 납부불성실가산세를 부담하게 한 것이 신의성실위반인지[국승]
Seoul Administrative Court 2008Guhap15862 ( November 12, 2008)
Whether it is against the good faith and good faith to make an additional payment due to delay in taxation;
Even if the plaintiff violated the duty to pay taxes under the law without a justifiable reason, it does not go against the principle of good faith unless the plaintiff violates the duty to pay taxes under the law.
The contents of the decision shall be the same as attached.
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked.
The Defendant imposed on the Plaintiff on March 8, 2001 value-added tax of KRW 109,97,577,570 for the second period of value-added tax of KRW 171 for the year 2001, KRW 87,834,200 for the second period of value-added tax of KRW 134,43,750 for the first period of the year 2002, KRW 68,816,510 for the second period of the year 2002, value-added tax of KRW 73,051,60 for the first period of the year 203, value-added tax of KRW 73,91,150 for the second period of the year 203, KRW 26,775,040 for the business year 201, corporate tax of KRW 254,043, corporate tax of KRW 2040 for the business year 203,309,20937.
1. Acceptance of a judgment of the court of first instance;
The reasoning for this Court’s explanation concerning this case is as follows: (a) the reasoning for the first instance judgment (except for the third party conclusion part) is as stated in Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, except for the following additions: (b) the fifth party of the first instance judgment’s 26 evidence.
2. Additional parts; and
(Plaintiff asserts that all evidence Nos. 8-1 through 7, 9-1, 2, and 24 of evidence Nos. 8-1 through 9 are false documents prepared by the official at charge of the tax investigation and the pressure and return of the official at charge, but there is no evidence to acknowledge such circumstance)
3. Conclusion
Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.