매수인에게 귀책되는 사유로 잔금기일을 연장하고 추가로 받은 금액은 기타소득인 위약금임[국승]
Seoul Administrative Court 2014Guhap63893 (Law No. 29 May 2015)
Seocho 2012west 2340 (No. 29, 2014)
The balance due to the cause attributable to the purchaser and the additional amount received by the purchaser shall be the penalty, which is other income;
(1) As stated in the judgment of the court of first instance, the remainder date is extended due to a cause attributable to the buyer and the amount additionally received constitutes a penalty, which is other income, and the penalty is not known as capital gains or global income is merely a site for the relevant statute and does not constitute a justifiable ground for additional tax reduction
Article 21 of the former Income Tax Act / [Other Incomes]
2015Nu46514 Total income and revocation of disposition
LAA
◉◉세무서장
Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2014Guhap63893 decided May 29, 2015
September 23, 2015
October 21, 2015
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 imposition of global income tax of KRW 0,000,000 (including additional tax) rendered by the Defendant to the Plaintiff on February 1, 2012 shall be revoked.
1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;
The reasoning for this Court’s explanation concerning this case is as follows: (a) adding the same content as Paragraph (2) to the 17th page of the judgment of the first instance; and (b) additional evidence submitted at the trial, which is insufficient to acknowledge the Plaintiff’s assertion as evidence; and (c) 16-1 and 2, are the same as the part of the reasoning for the judgment of the first instance, except for rejection of each description under Articles 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Additional parts
Inasmuch as the existence of justifiable grounds for failure to report and additional tax for failure to report ought to be determined at the same time, the Defendant asserts that the imposition of additional tax for failure to report is unlawful even if it is recognized that there is a justifiable reason not to impose additional tax for failure to report.
On the other hand, penalty taxes for failure to report and penalty taxes for failure to report cannot be deemed the same as the grounds for imposition or exemption (justifiable cause). Penalty taxes for failure to report are financial benefits for the amount paid by the taxpayer by the due date of payment, and have the nature of administrative sanctions imposed on the violation of the obligation for payment (see Supreme Court Decision 2008Du208, Jan. 28, 2010).
8505, 8512) The defendant's failure to file a report due to a difference in interpretation does not constitute an illegal act on the ground that the defendant imposed additional tax for failure to file a report even though it did not impose additional tax for failure to file a report due to a difference in interpretation. Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion is without merit.
3. Conclusion
Therefore, the judgment of the first instance court is legitimate, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.