[상속세경정거부처분취소][공2004.9.15.(210),1550]
Whether the grounds that were not alleged in the request for reduction can be asserted in the lawsuit seeking revocation of the disposition rejecting the correction (affirmative)
The tax authorities, upon receiving a request for correction, have the duty to investigate and confirm whether the tax base and tax amount recorded in the tax base return exceed the objectively legitimate tax base and tax amount to be reported under the tax laws. As such, as in a lawsuit seeking revocation of a tax disposition, a lawsuit seeking revocation of a rejection disposition as to the request for correction of reduction is also based on revocation of the substantive and procedural illegal grounds of the disposition of rejection. The object of the trial is the objective existence of the tax base and tax amount recorded in the tax base return. Since the individual illegal grounds for the determination of the tax base and tax amount are merely the means of attack and defense claiming that the determination of the tax base and tax amount is legitimate, the individual illegal grounds for the request for correction of reduction are merely the means of attack and defense claiming that the determination of tax base and tax amount is legitimate. Thus, all
Article 45-2(1)1 and (3) of the former Framework Act on National Taxes (amended by Act No. 6303, Dec. 29, 2000)
Plaintiff 1 and four others (Law Firm Maliba, Attorneys Lee Young-seok et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)
Daejeon Director of the Regional Tax Office
Supreme Court Decision 2000Du7537 Delivered on November 13, 2001
Daejeon High Court Decision 2001Nu2056 delivered on September 5, 2002
The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Daejeon High Court.
1. Regarding ground of appeal No. 1
A. The judgment of the court below
According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below acknowledged the facts as stated in its holding, and rejected the plaintiff's assertion that the illegality in calculating the value of inherited property which was not claimed at the time of the initial request for correction can be contested in the lawsuit seeking revocation of the rejection disposition of this case. The plaintiff's claim for correction of reduction under Article 45-2 (1) 1 of the former Framework Act on National Taxes (amended by Act No. 6303, Dec. 29, 200; hereinafter the same shall apply) means that the taxpayer who filed the return of tax base within the deadline for filing the return of tax base under each tax law files a request for reduction with the tax authority within the statutory period on the ground that the tax base and amount of tax were excessively reported due to the violation of the tax law, and the tax authority has a duty to investigate and confirm the grounds for filing the request for correction of tax amounting to KRW 85,200,000,000 which are subject to deduction of inherited property at the time of filing the return of inheritance tax base.
B. The judgment of this Court
Article 45-2 (1) 1 of the former Framework Act on National Taxes provides that a person who has filed a tax base return within the statutory due date of return shall file a request for the determination or correction of the tax base and amount on the tax base return (where the tax base and amount on the tax base return are determined or corrected under the provisions of each tax law, referring to the tax base and amount after such determination or correction; hereinafter the same shall apply) in excess of the tax base and amount to be reported under the tax law, within one year after the statutory due date of return elapses, and that the head of the tax office in receipt of a request for the determination or correction under the provisions of paragraphs (3) through (2) shall notify the person who filed the request of the determination or correction of the tax base and amount to the effect that there is no reason to make the determination or correction within two months after the date of receipt of the request. In full view of the above provisions, the tax office, which received a request for reduction or correction, shall investigate and confirm whether the tax base and amount on the tax base return exceed objectively legitimate grounds under the tax law.
Therefore, since individual illegal grounds for recognizing the tax base and the amount of tax are merely an attack and defense method claiming that their claims are justifiable, in making a request for correction of reduction, all individual illegal grounds should not be asserted, but a new argument can be asserted in a lawsuit seeking revocation of rejection disposition even if the matters that had not been asserted at the time of the request for correction of reduction were not asserted. Therefore, the court below should review and determine whether the calculation of the amount of the inherited property is illegal or not.
Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the lawsuit seeking revocation of a disposition rejecting correction.
2. Regarding ground of appeal No. 2
According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below determined that it is not sufficient to recognize that the deceased non-party, who was the decedent at the time of the commencement of the inheritance of this case, agreed to pay KRW 852 million to the owner of the building of this case on the basis of the facts in its reasoning, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge
In light of the records, the above recognition and decision of the court below is just, and there is no violation of the rules of evidence as otherwise alleged in the ground of appeal.
3. Therefore, the lower judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the lower court for a new trial and determination. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.
Justices Cho Cho-Un (Presiding Justice)