2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

3. Paragraph 1 can be provisionally executed.

The following facts are either disputed between the parties or acknowledged by Gap evidence Nos. 12-1 through 10 (including the number of each party), or by integrating the purpose of all pleadings.

A. On July 9, 2004, 2004, ○ Industry Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “○○ Industry Co., Ltd.”) was declared bankrupt by the Seoul Central District Court (2004○○○), and on the same day, the Plaintiff was appointed as a bankruptcy trustee of the bankrupt company.

B. From January 1, 2004 to June 30, 2004, the bankruptcy company failed to pay the total amount of KRW 6.577,368,000,000,000 from the value-added tax return for the pertinent taxable period, until it is declared bankrupt even when it is supplied goods or services by business partners, such as △△ Industry Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “the supplier of this case”), but it was deducted from the output tax amount at the time of filing the value-added tax return for the pertinent taxable period.

C. The supplier of this case reported to the head of the competent tax office a bad debt tax deduction for the reason that the total credit account receivables of KRW 6.57,368 million against the company of this case falls under Article 63-2 (1) 1 or 6 (Bankruptcy under the Bankruptcy Act) of the Enforcement Decree of the Enforcement Decree of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Business of Bankruptcy, and accordingly, the supplier of this case deducted each bad debt tax amount from the total amount of the bad debt tax amount of the value-added tax amount of the input tax return of each of the input tax return of 2004 (from July 1, 2004 to December 31, 2004) and 1,2 (1: 1: from January 1 to June 30, 205 to June 30, 2005: < Amended by Act No. 7204, Jul. 1, 2004; Act No. 7210, Dec. 31, 2004>

D. Around that time, the above chief of the tax office notified the head of ○○ Tax Office having jurisdiction over the bankrupt company of the details of the report of deduction of bad debt tax amount, and the head of ○○○ Tax Office, from April 20, 2005 to July 11, 2006, issued a notice of correction of the aggregate of value-added tax of KRW 597,607,410 (hereinafter “value-Added Tax”) pursuant to the proviso of Article 17-2(3) of the Value-Added Tax Act on 15 occasions between April 20, 200 to July 11, 2006. In the indication column of each tax payment notice, “○○○ industry (main owner)’s business registration number (resident registration number),” the address of the bankrupt company, written “○○○○○○ (workplace○○)” (hereinafter “instant disposition of imposition”).

E. Upon the instant disposition, the Plaintiff fully paid KRW 91,848,00 on May 2, 2005, KRW 185,831,80 on May 2, 2005, KRW 91,848,010 on May 31, 2005, KRW 23.49.050 on June 30, 2005, KRW 142,478,920 on November 7, 2005, KRW 78,632,260 on December 29, 2005, KRW 78,632,260 on April 20, 206, KRW 200 on April 38, 2006, KRW 200 on May 30,86, KRW 170 on August 4, 2006.

F. On the other hand, in the case of a taxpayer's bankruptcy, the ○○○ Company's bankruptcy is not entered in the form of "△△△△△△△△△△△△△ in the form of "△△△△△△△△△", and on February 4, 2005, the certified copy of the corporate register of the bankrupt company which was submitted at the time of filing a report to correct the change of address of the bankrupt company was bankrupt on July 9, 2004, and the representative director of the bankrupt company and the fact that the bankruptcy trustee is the plaintiff is the plaintiff.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The parties' assertion

(1) Summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion

The value-added tax of this case is not established before the bankruptcy is declared, and it does not constitute estate claims under Article 38 subparagraph 2 of the former Bankruptcy Act (amended by Act No. 7428 of Mar. 31, 2005; hereinafter referred to as the "former Bankruptcy Act"), or bankruptcy claims under Article 14 of the former Bankruptcy Act, and subordinate bankruptcy claims under Article 37 of the former Bankruptcy Act. Thus, the plaintiff is not a taxpayer of the value-added tax of this case, and thus the disposition of this case is an invalid disposition against a person who is not a taxpayer. Accordingly, the defendant is liable to pay the plaintiff the above amount of money and delay damages as unjust enrichment because the defendant received the above amount of money from the plaintiff who is not a taxpayer without any legal ground upon the disposition of this case that is null and void and thus, the defendant is liable to pay the plaintiff the above amount of money and delay damages.

(2) Summary of the defendant's assertion

Tax claims falling under estate claims are not 'a claim arising before bankruptcy declaration' but 'a claim arising prior to the declaration of bankruptcy'. Tax claims that accrue before the declaration of bankruptcy are not 'a claim arising prior to the declaration of bankruptcy', and value-added tax imposed on a person who is supplied with due to a supplier's bad debt tax is settled after the issue of double deduction of value-added tax for credit transaction initially accrued, and such cause of value-added tax should be deemed as the supply transaction of goods, etc., so this case's value-added tax is 'a tax claim arising prior to the declaration of bankruptcy' and the taxpayer becomes the plaintiff. Accordingly

(b) Related statutes;

Attached Form is as outlined.

C. Determination

(1) Determination as to whether the value-added tax of this case constitutes estate claims

(A) The Law of the Estate Claim

Article 38 subparagraph 2 of the former Bankruptcy Act provides that a claim that can be collected in accordance with the example of the National Tax Collection Act or the collection of national taxes belongs to the bankrupt estate only if the claim due to a cause after the declaration of bankruptcy falls under the bankruptcy estate. Therefore, in order for a taxation claim to become a estate claim under the Bankruptcy Act, if a claim due to a cause prior to the declaration of bankruptcy or a claim due to a cause after the declaration of bankruptcy is made

However, it is clear that this case's value-added tax imposed on the plaintiff does not fall under this case's value-added tax because it is the tax imposed on the plaintiff because it is the fact that the assets belonging to the bankrupt estate or the transfer of the assets belonging to the bankrupt estate are owned, or it is the tax imposed on the profits from the assets themselves. Therefore, it is a question whether this case's value-added tax constitutes "tax claim arising before the declaration of bankruptcy"

(B) The meaning of "tax claims arising before the declaration of bankruptcy"

The plaintiff asserts that the meaning of a taxation claim due to a cause before the declaration of bankruptcy should be interpreted as the meaning of "the creation of a taxation claim" before the declaration of bankruptcy, and the defendant asserts that it is sufficient to interpret that there exists a cause of "the creation of a taxation claim" before the declaration of bankruptcy before the declaration of bankruptcy, and that it does not need to establish a taxation claim. The issue of whether a taxation claim due to a cause prior to the declaration of bankruptcy falls under "the taxation claim due to a cause prior to the declaration of bankruptcy" under Article 38 subparagraph 2 of the former Bankruptcy Act shall be determined on the basis of whether the taxation requirements prescribed by the law are met before the declaration of bankruptcy (see Supreme Court Decision 2005Da3687, Oct. 12, 20

[Article 38 subparag. 2 of the former Bankruptcy Act provides for a taxation claim in certain cases as an estate claim. An estate claim can be repaid from a bankruptcy claim (Article 41 of the former Bankruptcy Act) with priority over a bankruptcy claim (Article 40 of the former Bankruptcy Act). Thus, each claim, other than a taxation claim, among the estate claims listed in any subparagraph of Article 38 of the former Bankruptcy Act, has a very superior position in a bankruptcy proceeding (Article 40 of the former Bankruptcy Act). However, each claim, other than a taxation claim, falls under the so-called foundation obligation (Article 38 subparag. 1 subparag. 3) that is necessarily necessary for the execution of bankruptcy proceedings with a third party, or falls under the common interest of all bankruptcy creditors (Article 4 through 8) (Article 38 subparag. 2 of the former Bankruptcy Act). On the contrary, a taxation claim cannot be deemed as a common interest of the bankruptcy creditors, and in particular, a taxation claim arising from a cause before the declaration of bankruptcy prior to the declaration of bankruptcy is guaranteed, and thus, it is difficult to interpret the tax claim amount under Article 38 subparag.

(C) Timing for establishing the instant taxation claim

According to Article 17-2 (1) and (3) of the Value-Added Tax Act, if a supplier sells goods on credit and 10% of the credit sales are included in the output tax amount as value-added tax, and if all or part of the credit sales claims, including value-added tax, have become final and conclusive as bad debt and it is impossible to recover it, the bad debt tax amount calculated as 10% of the bad debt amount may be deducted from the sales amount in the taxable period whereto belongs the date when the bad debt tax becomes final and conclusive. As such, if the supplier deducts the bad debt tax amount from the sales amount in the taxable period whereto belongs the date when the bad debt becomes final and conclusive, it shall be determined for the taxable period whereto belongs the date when the bad debt tax becomes final and conclusive. The Plaintiff’s previous declaration of bankruptcy cannot be viewed as having been made by deducting from the input tax amount in the taxable period whereto belongs the date when the bad debt tax amount becomes final and conclusive at the time of the tax claim or the date when the bad debt tax amount becomes final and conclusive, and thus, the Plaintiff’s assertion that the above provision should not be 20.

In the case of this case, when the supplier of this case returned to the case and the supplier of this case reports value-added tax of 2004 that became final and conclusive (from July 1, 2004 to December 31, 2004) and each taxable period of 2005 (from January 1, 2005 to June 30, 2005: 2: from July 1, 2004 to December 31, 2004) from each output tax amount of 597,607,410 won less the aggregate of the bad debt tax amount from each output tax amount of 204 to December 31, 2005, it is reasonable to view that the time when the value-added tax of this case becomes final and conclusive and that the supplier of this case is a bad debt tax amount of 2, 2004 to 2, 2005 and 2, 2005 to 31, 2005.

(D) Sub-committee

Therefore, the value-added tax of this case is established after the bankrupt was declared bankrupt, and it does not constitute estate claims.

(2) Determination as to whether the value-added tax of this case constitutes a bankruptcy claim

Bankruptcy claims provided for in Article 14 of the former Bankruptcy Act refer to the right to claim property against the bankrupt before the declaration of bankruptcy, and as such, the value-added tax of this case is established after the declaration of bankruptcy, and it does not constitute bankruptcy claims, and it does not constitute interest damages or fines for negligence after the declaration of bankruptcy, which is subordinate bankruptcy claims provided for in Article 37 of the former Bankruptcy Act.

(3) A taxpayer of the instant value-added tax

Therefore, the value-added tax of this case does not belong to estate claims or bankruptcy claims, and as a result, does not include the scope of the plaintiff's right to manage and dispose of the bankruptcy estate that consists of the bankrupt's assets when the bankruptcy is declared. Therefore, it is clear that the taxpayer of the value-added tax of this case is a bankruptcy company that is not the plaintiff (the tax authority shall impose taxes on the tax claims established after the bankruptcy is declared, such as the value-added tax of this case on the taxpayer as the bankrupt company (representative: representative director) and receive repayment from the "free property that

(4) Whether the instant disposition was effective

As seen earlier, upon examining whether the person liable to pay the value-added tax of this case is the bankrupt company, the following circumstances are acknowledged by the other party to the disposition in relation to the legality of the disposition in this case and the purport of all pleadings, i.e., ① the taxpayer in each tax notice notice notice notified by the head of ○○ Tax Office included the Plaintiff’s name, which is the trustee in bankruptcy, in the information column for each taxpayer in the tax notice notice notice notice notice, and ② the Defendant’s ○ electronic computer system under the Defendant provides that it is impossible to indicate the trustee in bankruptcy. In this case, the Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff, who is the trustee in bankruptcy, is the trustee in bankruptcy, and the Plaintiff is the taxpayer in bankruptcy and the representative director, who is not the bankruptcy company, in order to impose the disposition on the bankrupt company as the person liable to pay the tax (the Defendant must indicate the representative of the bankrupt company, not the trustee in bankruptcy). (3) In full view of the circumstances such as the Plaintiff’s disposition in this case and the payment of the value-added tax of this case as the bankrupt estate’s property.

(5) Sub-committee

Therefore, the defendant received 597,607,410 won from the plaintiff without any tax liability based on the disposition of this case that was null and void and earned profits without any legal grounds. The plaintiff suffered damages equivalent to the same amount, and the defendant has a duty to pay 597,607,410 won to the plaintiff for 185,831,80 won from May 2, 2005 to 91,848,010 won, the payment date of which was 23,49,050 won from May 31, 2005 to 142,478,920 won from June 30, 2005 to 78,632,660,260, the payment date of which was 200,68,5000 won from the day after the day of payment, to the day after 20,6360,68,206,500 won from the day of payment, respectively.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

Related Acts and subordinate statutes

former Bankruptcy Act (amended by Act No. 7428 of March 31, 2005)

Article 6 (Legal Foundation)

(1) All properties owned by the bankrupt at the time that the bankrupt is declared bankrupt shall be considered as the bankrupt estate.

(2) Any claim by the bankrupt before the bankruptcy is declared shall belong to the bankrupt estate.

(3) Property which cannot be seized shall not belong to the bankrupt estate: Provided, That this shall not apply to the articles and claims prescribed in subparagraphs 4 through 6 of Article 195 and subparagraphs of Article 246 (1) of the Civil Execution Act.

Article 7 (Administration and Disposal)

The right to manage and dispose of the bankrupt estate shall belong to the bankruptcy trustee.

Article 14 (Definition of Bankruptcy Claims)

Any claim on property against the bankrupt arising before the bankruptcy is declared, shall be a bankruptcy claim.

Article 37 (Subordinate Claim)

The following claims shall be subordinate to other bankruptcy claims:

1. Interest after bankruptcy is declared;

2. The amount of damages and penalty resulting from nonperformance after bankruptcy is declared;

3. Expenses incurred in participating in bankruptcy procedures;

4. Fines, minor fines, criminal litigation costs, additional charges and fines for negligence;

5. Where the deadline for interest-free claims arrives after bankruptcy is declared, the portion equivalent to the amount of interest calculated by the account that makes the total amount of the principal calculated based the statutory interest from the time bankruptcy is declared until the deadline of the claim;

6. In cases of uncertainty of interest-free obligations, the portion equivalent to the difference between such amount of obligation and the appraised value at the time bankruptcy is declared;

7. In the case of periodic payment claims, the claim amount and duration of which are confirmed, when the portion equivalent to the total amount of interest calculated according to the provisions of subparagraph 5 with respect to the periodic payments and the total principal calculated according to the provisions of the same subparagraph with respect to the periodic payments exceeds the principal from which statutory interest equivalent accrues on the periodic payments.

Article 38 (Scope of Estate Claims)

The following claims shall be regarded as estate claims:

2. Claims that can be collected according to the example of the National Tax Collection Act or the collection of national taxes, but claims on grounds arising after bankruptcy is declared, shall be limited to those arising with respect to the bankrupt estate

Basic Act

Article 21 Time when tax liability comes into existence

(1) A liability to pay national taxes shall accrue at the following time:

7. For value-added taxes, when a taxable period is terminated: Provided, That for imported goods, when an import declaration is filed with the head of customhouse;

Value-Added Tax Act

Article 3 Taxable Period

(1) The taxable period of value-added taxes for entrepreneurs shall be as follows:

First period: from January 1 to June 30; and

2. Second period: from July 1 to December 31.

(3) The taxable period in cases where a business operator closes down shall be from the first day of the taxable period in which the date of closedown falls to the date of closedown: Provided, That where he/she ceases to commence the business after registration pursuant to the proviso of Article 5 (1), it shall be from the date

Article 17-2 Tax Credit for Second Bad Debt

(1) In case where an entrepreneur supplies goods or services subject to the imposition of value-added tax, and where the whole or part of credit sales and other sales claims (referring to those including value-added tax) related to the supply of the relevant goods or services are bad debt and irrecoverable due to the bankruptcy, compulsory execution and other causes as prescribed by the Presidential Decree, the amount calculated by the following formula (hereinafter referred to as the “net debt tax amount”) may be deducted from the output tax amount in the taxable period whereto belongs the date when the bad debt becomes final and conclusive: Provided, That in case where the relevant entrepreneur recovers the whole or part of bad debt amount,

Bad debt tax amount = bad debt amount = 10/110

(3) In the application of the provisions of paragraphs (1) and (2), when the business operator in receipt of the supply of goods or services has the whole or part of bad debt tax amount deducted as the input tax amount under Article 17, and when the bad debt of the supplier is finalized before the business closure of the relevant supplied business operator, the relevant bad debt tax amount shall be subtracted from the input tax amount in the taxable period whereto belongs the date when the bad debt becomes final and conclusive: Provided, That where the relevant business operator

Enforcement Decree

Article 63-2 (Scope of Tax Credit for Second Bad Debt)

(1) "Bankruptcy, compulsory execution and other causes prescribed by Presidential Decree" in Article 17-2 (1) of the Act means the following:

Cases falling under any of the following subparagraphs:

1. Bankruptcy under the Bankruptcy Act (including compulsory composition);

6. Where six months have passed since the date on which a check or a bill was defaulted; and

(2) The scope of bad debt tax amount under the provisions of Article 17-2 of the Act shall be the bad debt tax amount determined on the grounds of each subparagraph of paragraph (1) by the deadline for filing a final return on the taxable period in which five years have elapsed since the business operator supplied the goods or services on

(3) Where a supplier deducts a bad debt tax amount from the output tax amount under the main sentence of Article 17-2 (1) of the Act, the head of the competent tax office of the supplier shall notify the head of the competent tax office of the person who is supplied with the bad debt tax amount, and where the person provided with the provisions of the main sentence of Article 17-2 (3) of the Act fails to report

(4) Any business operator who intends to obtain a bad debt tax credit under Article 17-2 (1) of the Act or to add the bad debt tax amount to the input tax amount under Article 17-2 (5) of the Act shall submit (including a submission via the national tax information and communications network) a report on the confirmation of value-added tax under Article 65 (1) 1 to the head of the competent tax office, along with the documents attesting the bad debt tax credit, the bad debt tax return