[2] The scope of the written investigation decision and request for correction

[2] Where it is clear that the adjusted account statement was prepared in a false and processed manner without any basis, or it is objectively evident that the revenue amount was omitted from the beginning without being included in the content of the report, or that there was an omission or error by the content of the report itself, etc., the tax base and tax amount may be determined as a field investigation or an additional investigation without making a written investigation. However, if it is not so, it shall be determined based on the contents of the tax base and the adjusted account statement (if it is within the scope of the reported contents, including the determination of the tax base and tax amount by adding or adding the amount of gross income or the amount of income through the Si/Gun/Gu procedures on the calculation of earnings or necessary expenses under the Income Tax Act within the scope of the reported contents), the content itself is denied, and it cannot be said that there is a result of a field investigation or an investigation that requires the submission of documentary evidence pursuant to Article 100(5) of the former Income Tax Act (amended by Act No. 4520, Dec. 8, 1992) for this purpose.

1. Article 119 (1) of the Income Tax Act (amended by Act No. 4520 of Dec. 8, 1992) provides, “In the final return on a tax base, if a taxpayer accompanying an adjusted account statement confirmed by a certified tax accountant that the contents of the tax are justifiable under the conditions as prescribed by the Presidential Decree, the tax base and tax amount shall be determined through a written review: Provided, That this shall not apply in case where the entries are incomplete or are recognized to be incomplete or false, or where the Presidential Decree prescribes otherwise.” Article 167 (1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act (amended by the Presidential Decree No. 13194 of Dec. 31, 1990) provides, “Where a taxpayer under each subparagraph of Article 167 (1) of the Income Tax Act (amended by the Presidential Decree No. 13194 of Dec. 31, 190) makes a final return on a tax base with an adjusted account statement attached to the final return on a tax base, the tax base and tax amount may be determined only through a written investigation, without a written investigation, and where it is acknowledged.

If the Commissioner of the National Tax Service may trust the reported revenue amount, such as a person whose total revenue amount, income amount, or business income amount, which the Government has reported in the relevant year is above the standard income ratio, or whose total revenue amount can be easily calculated, only a person liable for tax payment prescribed by Acts and subordinate statutes, who is prescribed by the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes, submits a written income confirmation return along with an adjusted account statement prepared by a certified tax accountant, etc., the determination of the tax base and tax amount is made on behalf of the Government by making the person subject to written investigation determination, certified tax accountants, etc. prepare and submit an adjusted account statement that the entries in the final tax return are correct in accordance with the tax base investigation and income amount statement, thereby making the person liable for tax payment on an on-site investigation to prepare and submit such adjusted account statement that the entries in the final tax return are correct, and on the other hand, his/her intention is to raise the efficiency of tax administration and promote convenience of the taxpayer, or if it is evident that the amount of revenue was entirely omitted without the content of the return, but it is unreasonable or unreasonable within the scope of the tax base investigation or adjustment statement.

Of those cited by the proviso of Article 119(1) of the Income Tax Act and each subparagraph of Article 167(2) of the Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act based thereon, among those cited as reasons for which the tax base and tax amount can be determined through a field investigation or an estimate investigation, the above (i), (ii), (iii) cases where it is evident that the above revenue amount was omitted from the beginning without being included in the contents of the report at all, or that there was a declaration of revenue amount, but it is objectively evident that the contents of the report themselves committed omission or error. Thus, it is reasonable that the tax base and tax amount can be determined through a field investigation or an estimate investigation without undergoing a written investigation in case there is such reason. The above (iv) causes require a tax office to submit necessary books and documentary evidence in calculating the tax base from the taxpayer and to verify and investigate the authenticity thereof. Thus, it is difficult to determine the tax base and tax amount through such field investigation. Thus, the taxpayer can request the taxpayer to correct documentary evidence on the premise that there are reasons such as the field investigation, etc., but can not determine the tax base and tax amount.

2. On the other hand, the court below may request the submission of books or documentary evidence kept and recorded pursuant to the provisions of Article 100(5) of the Income Tax Act at any time in order to verify whether the contents of the tax are false or not, in addition to the adjusted account statement. If, in calculating the tax base, there is no necessary account books and documentary evidence and it falls under the grounds for estimation determination under the provisions of each subparagraph of Article 169(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act, such as the absence of necessary account books and documentary evidence, the court below held that when the plaintiff who is a housing constructor filed the global income tax return by attaching the adjusted account statement of the tax accountant under Article 119(1) of the Income Tax Act with regard to the payment of the pay, labor cost and material cost stated in the income statement, calculation of the construction cost statement, and withholding of Class A earned income tax, the court below determined that the plaintiff's submission of the books and documentary evidence cannot be submitted by the plaintiff's submission of the revised investigation or documentary evidence, which constitutes an unlawful investigation or documentary evidence determination under Article 16(1).

3. Therefore, the lower judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the lower court for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Lee Yong-hun (Presiding Justice)