(심리불속행)원고가 제공한 용역이 면세대상인지 여부[국승]
Seoul High Court-2017-Nu-47924 ( August 24, 2017)
(C) Whether the service provided by the Plaintiff is exempt from tax
(At the same time as the judgment of the first instance court) cannot be viewed as subject to the VAT exemption under Article 12 (1) 5 of the former Value-Added Tax Act, Article 29 (1) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act.
Article 12 of the Value-Added Tax Act
Supreme Court Decision 2017Du60260 Decided revocation of Disposition imposing Value-Added Tax
AA
BB Director of the Tax Office
December 7, 2017
1. All appeals are dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.
All of the records of this case and the judgment of the court below and the grounds of appeal were examined, but the argument on the grounds of appeal by the appellant falls under Article 4 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure of Appeal, and therefore, the appeal is dismissed under Article 5 of the same Act. It is so decided as