2. Of the costs of lawsuit, 70% shall be borne by the Plaintiff, and the remainder 30% shall be borne by the Defendant.

A. The Plaintiff is a company, the purpose of which is the specific telecommunications business, value-added telecommunications business, etc. under the Telecommunications Business Act, and which is a subsidiary in Korea established by 100% investment of Blomg Liberg Partnership (hereinafter “NonELP”) with its main office in 731 New York, New York, a New York Partnership (hereinafter “Blomg Limited Partnership”) in the United States.

B. On March 1, 1996, the Plaintiff entered into a service contract with the NonELP, and collected and delivered to the NonELP the economic and other information of major companies in the Korea capital market and major in the U.S. to be included in the NonELP (hereinafter “instant information collection services”) and the following: (a) the import, installation, maintenance, and repair of equipment such as the private-use computer, the street and the Lane (hereinafter “instant equipment installation services”). However, the instant equipment installation services did not directly provide the NonELP with the Plaintiff, and concluded a service contract with the Common Enbine Encine Ltd. (hereinafter “S”) to enable the Plaintiff to carry out the instant equipment installation services.

C. From 197 to 2002, the Plaintiff received, through a foreign exchange bank, an amount equivalent to 110% of the expenses incurred in the course of performing the instant information collection services and the instant equipment installation services (hereinafter referred to as “instant information collection services”) as the proceeds from the supply of the instant information collection services and the instant equipment installation services (hereinafter referred to as “instant equipment installation services”). The Plaintiff reported the zero-rate tax base and tax amount by deeming that the instant supply falls under the foreign exchange exchange service prescribed in Article 11(1)4 of the Value-Added Tax Act and Article 26(1)1 of the Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act.

D. The Seoul Regional Tax Office, from July 22, 2002 to September 16, 2002, conducted a regular tax investigation with respect to the Plaintiff, and as a result, the non-ELP had operated a permanent establishment in Korea by using the Plaintiff’s human resources and physical facilities, etc., the subsidiary company of the Plaintiff, etc., and the instant service is provided to the domestic business place of non-ELP, and thus, it does not constitute zero-rate tax sales because it does not constitute foreign exchange earnings under Article 11(1)4 of the Value-Added Tax Act. The Seoul Regional Tax Office, from July 2, 2002 to September 16, 2002, notified the Defendant of the results of such tax investigation.

E. According to the above notification, the Defendant ex officio registered the business in the name of non-ELP by making the Plaintiff’s head office (Seoul Jongno-gu, hereinafter omitted) at the place of business at non-ELP’s place of business. The Defendant converted the sales of the instant service reported at zero tax rate to the general sales (Sales to which the value-added tax applies 10%) and imposed each value-added tax on each of the instant services indicated in the attached Form No. 1 on the date of each disposition on imposition in the attached Form No. 1 (hereinafter the imposition of each of the

F. The plaintiff is dissatisfied with each of the dispositions of this case, and the defendant's disposition of imposition on January 15, 2003 was filed on April 15, 2003, and the defendant's disposition of imposition on January 19, 2004 was filed on April 12, 2004, but all of the appeals was dismissed on July 5, 2005, and the defendant's disposition of imposition on June 16, 2004 was filed on September 17, 2004, respectively, and was dismissed on September 23, 2005. < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 19054, Sep. 17, 2004; Presidential Decree No. 18787, Oct. 15, 2004; Presidential Decree No. 19070, Sep. 23, 2005>

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap evidence 1-1-9, Eul evidence 2-1 through 4, Eul evidence 1-1-9, Eul evidence 2, Eul evidence 5 and 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether each of the dispositions of this case is legitimate

A. The parties' assertion

(1) The plaintiff's assertion

(A) The Defendant: (a) deemed that the instant service was supplied to a permanent establishment in the Republic of Korea of ELP; (b) received each of the instant dispositions; (c) however, there is no permanent establishment in the Republic of Korea of ELP as follows. Accordingly, the instant service is subject to zero tax rate as foreign exchange earnings for non-residents, etc. who have no domestic place of business as prescribed in Article 11(1)4 of the Value-Added Tax Act and Article 26(1)1

1) The Plaintiff and the SPS’s activities are basically not activities of nonELP but activities of the Plaintiff and the SPS. The Plaintiff and the SPS’s owners are the Plaintiff. The owners of the NP equipment and the B Budlerg are the Plaintiff, and the nonELP have only contractual rights to only demand the installation, maintenance, and repair of the said equipment under the Plaintiff and the service agreement, and do not have exclusive authority to dispose of, or use, the Nodrid equipment and the Budlerg receiver. Moreover, the delivery of information through the said equipment is merely preliminary and auxiliary activities rather than mere information transmission equipment and the mere information transmission equipment and the Budlerg receiver do not constitute a preliminary and auxiliary activities, and the non-ELP did not run the leased business against domestic customers.

Therefore, the Nold equipment and the Blstberg receiver cannot serve as a component of the permanent establishment in the Republic of Korea of nonELP.

2) Although the Hong Kong branch employees from the Hong Kong branch’s Hong Kong branch’s Hong Kong branch’s visits to Korea intermittently and conduct promotion and publicity activities at the customer office and the Plaintiff’s office’s educational activities for customers, such activities cannot be deemed as an essential and important business activity of the nonELP business. Moreover, it cannot be deemed that there was a right of non-ELP’s prompt and exclusive disposition or right to use the customer office, Plaintiff office, etc. where such activities are conducted intermittently.

Therefore, it cannot be deemed that a permanent establishment exists in the above customer office, Plaintiff office, etc.

3) Even if a combination of business activities through the Round equipment and budio receiver, the Plaintiff’s office (education place), etc. is combined, such combined activities cannot be deemed as an essential and important act for providing financial information services to domestic customers. Therefore, non-ELP cannot be deemed as having a permanent establishment in the Republic of Korea.

(B) Even if a permanent establishment exists in the Republic of Korea, the instant service cannot be deemed to have been supplied through the permanent establishment as a service supplied under a direct contract with the non-ELP headquarters. In particular, the instant information collection service is related to the information collection and analysis function of the non-ELP headquarters and the information is stored in the non-ELP headquarters server, so there is no room to supply it to the domestic permanent establishment. Accordingly, even if the permanent establishment exists in the Republic of Korea, the instant service is foreign exchange earnings for the non-residents, etc. having the domestic place of business as prescribed in Article 26(1)1-2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act, and is also subject to zero tax rate.

(2) The defendant's assertion

(A) NonELP has a permanent establishment in the Republic of Korea as follows:

1) The business operated by non-ELP is not merely a simple digital information sales business, but also a service for information and communications devices such as allowing software use, providing information, leasing equipment, electronic commerce, and providing communication functions using Blstberg network. Non-ELP has the authority to dispose of or use the above equipment by leasing drid equipment, Blstberg reception equipment, etc. from the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff and the employees of the SilPP were used as its subordinate, performance assistant, or performance agent for performing the above information and communications de facto service (such as provision of information, Blstler lease, etc.). Non-ELP used the above information and communications de facto service (such as provision of information, Blstler lease, etc.). In order for non-ELP to provide domestic customers with information efficiently and stably, it is essential for customers to pay user fees for Blstlerg reception equipment to non-ELP. In light of the fact that it is directly related to non-ELP’s profit-making.

2) The employees of nonELP Hong Kong Branch were staying in Korea for a long time and engaged in promotional activities at the Plaintiff’s or customer’s office along with the Plaintiff’s employees. The Plaintiff’s office engaged in educational activities at the Plaintiff’s office, as well as engaged in negotiations with customers on the price conditions of services provided to customers, condition of the use of equipment, etc. This may be deemed as a permanent establishment in Korea where the employees of nonELP Hong Kong branch performed essential and important activities of nonELP business through the Plaintiff’s office, etc.

3) Even if business activities conducted in the above Round equipment, studio receiver, or the Plaintiff’s office do not individually constitute the essential and important part of the non-ELP business, if all acts performed at the above physical facilities are combined by the employees of the Plaintiff, SilP, and non-ELP Hong Kong branch, such combined activities may be deemed to constitute the essential and important part of the non-ELP business. Thus, the permanent establishment in the Republic of Korea of non-ELP exists at the location of the above Rod equipment, etc.

(B) Services provided by the Plaintiff to NonELP are ① the provision of personal mobility services, ② the lease, maintenance, and repair of Budioberg receiver, ③ the lease, maintenance, and repair of NoEL equipment, ④ the lease, maintenance and repair of NonELP’s exclusive Network for the operation of information provision business to customers in the Republic of Korea, ④ Cordin promotion services, ⑤ sales promotion services in Korea, etc., and these services were provided to NonELP via permanent establishment in the Republic of Korea.

Therefore, "other foreign exchange earnings service" under Article 11 (1) 4 of the Value-Added Tax Act is not subject to zero tax rate.

(b) Related statutes;

It is as shown in the attached Table related statutes.

(c) Fact of recognition;

(1) Contents of services provided by ELI to domestic customers

(A) NonELP runs a service business that sells and provides financial information services by electronic means, including allowing access to a financial information database for all world customers, analyzing data for evaluation of financial products, and providing comprehensive news information (hereinafter “budio program providing”).

(B) Blstberg professional service is conducted through the process of collecting and processing information on each country’s financial markets and news and sending it to the ELP’s headquarters located in the United States through the process of verifying, properly modifying, editing, and analyzing the accuracy of the information, and the process of transmitting information stored in the ELP’s database, news information, and analysis data to the customers of non-ELP via the NAP through the NAV’s database, news information, and analysis data, or via the general Internet network. However, each country’s urgent information, such as the division of company’s shares, should be immediately provided to the customers in real time by inputtingP’s database.

(C) Conclusion of contracts for studioberg professional services, terms of contracts, etc.

(5) A New York contract team’s head office shall enter into a contract for the provision of a budio program with the domestic customers of non-ELP using the standardized studio program under the following. The main contents of the standardized studio program contract are ① The non-ELP shall allow the customers to use the studio program data, and the studio program software and the studio reception equipment (15) for the use of the above service, directly or through a third party’s agent, provide the customers with the studio program’s reception of information (Article 1). ② The customers shall provide the information on the studio program and the studio program’s reception of the studio program and the studio program’s reception of information at the customer’s request, ③ the reception of information on the studio program or other information service or the user’s reception of information on the studio program or the user’s reception of information on the studio program or other authorized modification of the studio.

(ii)a summary of the Round equipment and budio receiver;

(A) Round equipment is a device that delivers data, such as financial information, to customers in the process of providing Budler program at the New York headquarters, via an intermediate intermediate transmission of such data, at the headquarters of ELP. It consists of a device that controls the direction of transmission of information, such as a device, a device capable of transmitting such data in a more small capacity so that the data can be transmitted to customers by dividing it into a more small capacity, such as a device, a device that stores the function of a core device, a device that can save the device and downloads the device, and then can seek the device again from the device. The device consists of a device that alters the data signal from the digital via an Arabic to the Arabic, a device that can function as a whole as a system that properly regulates the function of each of the above equipment in the U.S., and it does not constitute a modified computer and a device that receives the information from the device itself.

(B) Budioberg receiver is a computer device established in the office of a customer who receives Budioberg professional services, consisting of computer principal body, producer monitoring, keyboard, and router, and is used in transmitting and receiving Budio program professional services, etc. between the U.S.’s national computer and the U.S.’s national computer mediating Rod equipment, and also performs functions as a general computer such as document work or Internet access.

(C) In a case where nonELP provides a studer program to customers using the general Internet network without using the Rodrid equipment, there is a concern that the physical phenomenon may occur due to the U.S. line’s excessive numbers, and it is difficult for a customer to manage the program, such as a concern about hacking and a possibility of hacking, and it is difficult for a customer to easily confirm whether an error has occurred during the use.

(D) In order for domestic customers of nonELP to receive studioberg professional services, the use of drum equipment and budio server receiver is not necessarily required. Of the customers, 20% of the customers are not via an exclusive line using drum equipment but through a general Internet network.

(3) The conclusion of a service contract between the Plaintiff and ELP, etc.

(A) On March 1, 1996, the Plaintiff entered into a service contract with non-ELP, a parent company, and the main contents are as follows.

1. The Plaintiff will provide the services listed in Annex I in Annex I to ELP under the definitions and conditions set out in this Agreement, including all expenses incurred within the scope of the items listed in Annex I.

2. NonELP shall pay the operating expenses required by the Plaintiff to the Plaintiff (or shall be paid in cash). The scope of operating expenses is as listed in the attached Table 2 (attached Form 2 may be changed according to the intention of the Party).

3. In return for the Plaintiff’s provision of the service to ELP, the ELP should pay to the Plaintiff the consideration calculated in accordance with the attached Form 3.

(B) In accordance with the above service contract, the Plaintiff purchased information delivery equipment from a third party to enter the information delivery equipment into the database of the New York, and directly installs Switzerland’s business site, which is the core equipment, and the equipment such as Budioberg receiver, etc., upon the subcontract with the SPS, have the SPS set up and maintain and repair the equipment at the customer’s office. The Plaintiff’s employees in charge of collecting information collect basic information on the domestic financial market and send it to the U.S. nonELP head office to the U.S. non-ELP head office for processing, editing, and analyzing the information, and enable the U.S. head office to enter the information into the database of the nonELP computer. The Plaintiff received from nonELP the amount equivalent to 10% service fees, such as employees’ pay, related taxes, general expenses, news-related expenses, office rent, related equipment, communication expenses, food expenses, payment fees, and service charges for the SP.

(4) The conclusion of a service contract between the Plaintiff and the SPS

(A) As a value-added telecommunications business operator under the Telecommunications Business Act, SP is an independent third-party company that has no capital investment relationship with the Plaintiff or NonELP, and provides additional telecommunications services to GE, Worldcom and other small and medium enterprises in addition to the Plaintiff and NonELP.

(B) On January 1, 1996, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for the supply, maintenance, and repair of the No.S. equipment and budio receiver, and the repair services. The main contents of the contract are ① Operation of No.S. to ensure that the domestic customers of NonELP during the contract period do not cause inconvenience to the domestic customers of NonELPP during the contract period, and the PP shall operate equipment within the scope of operation established by the Plaintiff by importing equipment in the Plaintiff’s name, and the PP. Operation of the equipment. ② Operation of No.S. equipment and the Plaintiff installed in the office of the PPS, and the Plaintiff shall perform the services for the operation, maintenance, repair, etc. of the equipment, including assembly, installation, etc. of No.S. equipment, and the Plaintiff shall perform the general maintenance, maintenance, and repair services for Budlerg receiver and receive service fees from the Plaintiff for the installation, maintenance, and repair services.

(5) Conclusion, etc. of a service contract between ELP and Pacific

On February 15, 1996, nonELP entered into a service contract for remote communications services for domestic customers of nonELP and for terminal equipment maintenance and repair necessary therefor. The main contents of the contract include ① nonELP provides studio program personal services to domestic customers of the Republic of Korea through facilities necessary for the operation of remote communications services of non-ELPPPP, ② studio program personal services are provided to non-ELP customers of the Republic of Korea through communication equipment such as street equipment; ② studio program personal services are provided to domestic customers of non-ELP during the contract period; ③ studio program providing equipment related to the installation and maintenance of equipment in relation to the domestic customers of non-ELP; ③ studio is provided with adequate office space necessary for the provision of services to non-ELP customers; and ④ studio is provided with adequate list of equipment and equipment necessary for the operation of the office and personnel of the Hong Kong system; and ④ studio is provided with reasonable information on its own or within its own free of charge in relation to the domestic service.

(6) Under each of the above services agreements between the Plaintiff and non-ELP, SP, install and maintain, repair, and manage office equipment in the SPS office, and manage the appropriate number of the units by importing the Budlerg receiver and managing it in inventory. The network called the EDI system electronically connected with non-ELP Hong Kong Branch, the Plaintiff, etc., in real time, install, maintain, and manage Blstlerg receiver at the non-ELP’s customer office.

(7) Activities at nonELS Hong Kong Branch

(A) NonELP has its main hub in Hong Kong, Singapore, and Pacific region for the business of the Asia and the Pacific region, and each branch has sales-related sectors. These branch organizations are not only the information collection and provision of information about the region under their jurisdiction, but also sales-related support activities, including education on the promotion of advertisements, publicity, etc., and methods of using information to customers.

(B) The Hong Kong branch under the jurisdiction of the Republic of Korea has four employees in charge of Korea as of December 31, 2001. The business employees in charge of the Hong Kong branch in charge of the Republic of Korea visited the Republic of Korea (from 2000 to 2002, 536 days in total for the period of 4 employees from 200 to 2002) at the customer office or hotel, etc. of the Republic of Korea, and conducted education and training on contractual terms, such as support duties, such as advertisement, publicity, etc., such as the introduction of Blstberg professional services, and information usage fees, at the Plaintiff’s office, for customers.

(C) On receipt of an order for entering into a contract for the service of a potential customer, the non-ELP branch directly entered into a contract with the customer through mail after reviewing and approving the conclusion of the contract for all transaction conditions, such as the price, payment method, the rights and obligations of the contracting parties, and the list of incentives, etc. of the non-ELP head office.

【In the absence of dispute, the grounds for recognition” are as follows: Gap's 5, 8, Gap's 9-1 through 3, Eul's 10-1, 2, Eul's 14-1, 17, Gap's 18-1 through 5, Gap's 19-1 through 3, Gap's 20-1, 21-2, Gap's 22-1, 23-2, Gap's 23-1 through 3, Eul's 24, Eul's 3-9, Eul's 10-1 through 3, Eul's 11-18, 20-1, 21-2, Eul's 21, and each of the arguments, the purport of the whole arguments, and the purport of arguments.

D. Determination

(1) Article 11(1)4 of the Value-Added Tax Act provides that the zero tax rate shall apply to the supply of goods or services for earning foreign currency as prescribed by the Presidential Decree. Article 26(1)1 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act (a summary of each part of the Enforcement Decree related to each disposition of this case; hereinafter the same shall apply) provides that where a domestic supply is made to a nonresident or a foreign corporation having no domestic place of business in Korea and the payment is made in Korean currency at a foreign exchange bank, the zero tax rate shall apply. Article 1-2 provides that where a nonresident or a foreign corporation has a domestic place of business in the Republic of Korea and receives the payment from a foreign nonresident or a foreign corporation in Korean currency through a foreign exchange bank, the zero tax rate shall apply to such goods or services.

In addition, the purport of Article 26(1)1-2 of the Enforcement Decree of the above Act is to apply the zero tax rate to goods or services supplied without going through a direct contract with a foreign nonresident or foreign corporation in the Republic of Korea (see Supreme Court Decision 85Nu539 delivered on January 28, 1986, etc.).

In this case, as seen in the above facts, there is no dispute between the parties that the plaintiff entered into a service contract directly with the nonELP and supplied the service of this case and received the price in Korean currency through the foreign exchange bank from the nonELP. In addition, even if the domestic permanent establishment of nonELP exists in the service of this case, there is no dispute between the parties that the information collection service was directly provided to nonELP without going through the permanent establishment.

Therefore, the issue of the instant case is whether the ELP has a permanent establishment in the Republic of Korea, and if the ELP has a permanent establishment in the Republic of Korea, whether the provision of equipment installation services among the instant services was made through the domestic permanent establishment.

(2) Whether a permanent establishment in the Republic of Korea exists

In determining the existence of a domestic permanent establishment of the nonELP, the definition or example provisions of the Convention between the Republic of Korea and the United States of America for the Avoidance of Double Taxation and the Prevention of Fiscal Evasion with respect to Taxes on Income and the Encouragement of International Trade and Investment (hereinafter referred to as the “Korea-U.S. Tax Convention”) should be applied with priority over the OECD Model Convention. In addition, there is no dependent agent (in conclusion of a contract or inventory holding agent) of the non-ELP as defined in Article 9 (4) of the Korea-U.S. Tax Convention in Korea, and the defendant also has a general permanent establishment, not deemed a permanent establishment, which is defined in Article 9 (4) of the Korea-U.S. Tax Convention in Korea, so the existence of the general permanent establishment is limited

(A) With respect to the term "permanent establishment", Article 9 (1) of the Korea-U.S. Tax Convention defines that a resident of any Contracting State means a fixed place for business engaged in an industrial or commercial activity; (2) provides that (a), branch, (b), office, (c), factory, (d), warehouse, (f), store or other store; (g) mining, quarrying or other place for collecting natural resources for more than six months; (b) a building or construction or other facility for storing, exhibiting or delivering goods or goods belonging to a resident for storage, display or delivery; (b) holding stocks of goods or goods belonging to a resident for storage, display or delivery; (c) holding stocks of goods or goods for processing purposes; (d) holding stocks of goods or goods for storage, display or delivery; and (f) holding research or other similar construction works for the purpose of purchasing goods or goods; and (f) holding research or assistance to a resident for more than a fixed place for business purposes or providing information; and (3) holding such information for more than six (6) months of any new or similar purpose.

In light of the above provisions, in order for a permanent establishment of a foreign corporation to exist in the Republic of Korea, ① there is a fixed place of business, such as buildings, facilities, or equipment used to perform the business activities of the foreign corporation in the Republic of Korea, ② the foreign corporation has the right to dispose of or use the place of business, ② the foreign corporation has the right to dispose of or use the place of business, and ③ the employee of the foreign corporation or the person under its instruction requires “inherent and important business activities,” rather than preliminary and auxiliary activities, through the fixed place of business. We examine the above ①, ②, and ③.

(B) Whether the fixed business location of ELP exists in Korea (the above, ①, ② related to paragraphs)

1) 노드 장비와 블룸버그 수신기의 소유권이 원고에게 있고, 비엘피가 교육장소로 사용한 원고 사무실의 임차인은 비엘피가 아니라 원고이며, 원고가 이 사건 장비설치 용역을 수행한 것은 원고 자신의 사업 활동인 점을 감안하더라도 위 인정사실에서 본 다음과 같은 점 즉, ① 비엘피는 국내 고객들과 체결한 계약에 따라 국내 고객들에게 블룸버그 수신기를 제공할 의무가 있고, 제공된 장비를 유지, 보수할 의무가 있는 점, ② 원고는 비엘피와 체결한 용역계약에 따라 비엘피 및 제3자로부터 노드 장비와 블룸버그 수신기를 구입하여 노드 장비는 비엘피가 지정하는 시피에스 사무실에 직접 설치하였고, 블룸버그 수신기는 시피에스와의 하도급계약을 통하여 시피에스로 하여금 고객들의 사무실에 설치하게 한 후 이를 유지, 보수, 관리해 오도록 하고 있으며, 그와 같은 용역제공의 대가로 비엘피로부터 직원들 급여를 비롯하여 시피에스에게 지급하는 용역수수료 등 발생 경비의 110% 상당액과 노드 장비 및 블룸버그 수신기 등에 대한 미국의 기업회계기준에 따른 감가상각비용의 110% 상당액 등을 지급받고 있는 점, ③ 시피에스는 원고 및 비엘피와 사이에 각 노드 장비 및 블룸버그 수신기에 관한 설치, 유지·보수에 관한 용역계약을 체결하고 이에 따라 시피에스 사무실에 노드 장비를 설치하게 하고 블룸버그 수신기를 수입하여 적정 재고를 유지하면서 비엘피 홍콩지점 또는 원고로부터 작업지시를 실시간으로 받아 비엘피의 고객 사무실에 블룸버그 수신기를 설치하고 그 보수, 유지, 관리 작업을 수행해 오고 있으며, 원고 및 비엘피로부터 위와 같은 용역제공에 대한 대가를 지급받아 오고 있는 점, ④ 원고는 비엘피로부터 수수한 수수료가 이 사건 용역에 대한 대가라고 주장하나 비엘피가 원고에게 지급한 용역 수수료에는 사무실 임대 및 관련경비의 110%와 가구, 사무실 집기 비품에 대한 연간 감가상각비용의 110%가 포함되어 있고, 그 중에는 이 사건 용역 제공과는 무관한 교육장소 제공과 관련된 경비 등이 포함되어 있는 점, ⑤ 원고는 비엘피가 100% 출자한 국내 자회사로서 비엘피의 사업수행을 위하여 설립되었을 뿐 아니라 비엘피에게 이 사건 용역제공을 하는 것이 주된 사업인 점 등을 종합하여 보면, 이 사건 노드 장비와 블룸버그 수신기는 오로지 비엘피가 국내 고객들에게 블룸버그 프로페셔녈 서비스를 제공하기 위하여 원고와 비엘피, 씨피에스와의 용역계약에 따라 설치되고 고객들에게 제공된 것이고, 원고 사무실의 교육장소 또한 비엘피의 국내 고객들에게 블룸버그 프로페셔널 서비스 이용방법에 관한 교육을 위해 제공된 것으로 고정된 사업장소로서의 징표를 가질 뿐만 아니라 비엘피가 그에 대한 사실상 배타적인 지배권한 또는 사용권한을 가지고 있다고 할 것이므로 노드장비와 블룸버그 수신기 및 원고 사무실의 교육 장소는 비엘피의 “고정된 사업장소”를 구성한다.

2) In the electronic commercial transaction using a website and a server, the Plaintiff asserts that the place where the server was operated constituted a permanent establishment and customer receiving equipment such as the drum equipment and budio server do not constitute a permanent establishment. According to the note 42.9 of Article 5 of the OECD Model Treaty, the act of an Internet service supplier (SP)’s management of its server to provide services to customers is essential and important business activities, and therefore, it cannot be said that the server’s operation place is an essential and important business activity, but it does not constitute a permanent establishment. However, the Plaintiff’s assertion that there is no human and material facility other than the server is deemed to constitute a permanent establishment, and in the event there is no other human and material facility, the place where the server was established is deemed to constitute a permanent establishment, and the existence of the server can not be determined based on whether there is an essential and material facility through the relevant permanent establishment and whether there is an essential and material facility or not. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s assertion that this part of the server exists can not be accepted.

(C) Whether “inherent and important business activities are performed” through the business place in which non-ELP is fixed (No.S. equipment, studlerg receiver, and the Plaintiff’s office) (3)

1) The defendant asserts that the non-ELP did not merely sell financial information in Korea, but also leased equipment such as information transmission equipment (No.S. equipment and budio receiver), software usage, and also operated telecommunications function using the Budioberg network, and that the non-ELP was essential in Korea and carried out an important business activity.

However, in entering into a contract for the Budiober professional service, the use of the software or the telecommunication service using the Budiober network is merely incidental to the Budio-based personal service, and even if non-ELP receives the user fee for the Budio-based personal service, it is difficult to view that the Plaintiff and non-ELPS received the user fee for the budio-based personal service, as it is necessary to receive the information provided by non-ELP. However, there is no dispute between the parties concerned, but it is necessary to receive the user fee for the budio-based personal service. In addition to the provision of the Budio-based reception machine to the customers, it is only necessary to use the software or the telecommunication service using the Budio-based personal service, which is incidental to the Budio-based personal service, and even if non-ELP receives the user fee for the budio-based personal service cost including the cost for the budio-based personal service, it is difficult to view that the Plaintiff and the budio-based telecommunication service, other than the information service cost.

2) In addition to the instant service, the Defendant asserts that the Plaintiff’s services provided to non-ELP had been systematically connected with non-ELP’s domestic customers using an exclusive network of non-ELP to operate the information provision business with respect to the domestic customers of non-ELP, and that since the Plaintiff provided the core and important services to manage the business in Korea under the direction of non-ELP, it is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff provided the above services in addition to the instant services, only on the basis of the evidence Nos. 5 through 6, No. 9, No. 11, No. 12, No. 14, No. 20, No. 1, No. 21, No. 21, and No. 21, there is no evidence to acknowledge otherwise.

3) Details of the business activities through the fixed business place (No.S. equipment, studioberg receiver, and the Plaintiff’s office) of ELP

Business activities of the nonELP consisting of three-stage processes in which information collection personnel in all countries around the world collect each other's financial information and transmit it to the U.S. head office of the nonELP, and the accuracy of the information received by the U.S. head office of the nonELP, verify and analyze it, and then communicate it to the customers via the process and analysis process of information processing and analysis that the information entered into the State computer located in the U.S., and continuously and continuously provide a prompt and stable quality-quality video service to enable customers to continue to use the studiober program.

The Plaintiff asserts that, even if ELP merely delivers information to domestic customers, it constitutes a constituent element of the Nodd Equipment and Blstlerg’s receiving machine, it is merely a preliminary and incidental business activity of ELP.

However, it is reasonable to view that there is no essential function to convey information to customers, and that the main function of which is to receive information from non-EL-based customers, and that it is not necessarily necessary for domestic customers to use studio telecommunication equipment and studio telecommunication equipment to use the studio telecommunication equipment. In other words, it is reasonable to view that domestic finance companies and securities companies are providing real-time information on the world 24 hours, and that it is reasonable to view that there is no need to provide information on the studio telecommunication equipment and services, and that there is no need to promptly and stably provide information on the studio telecommunication equipment and services, and that there is no need to provide information on the studio telecommunication equipment and services to the domestic customers. Therefore, it is difficult to view that there is an important risk that the studio telecommunication equipment and services are being supplied to the domestic customers without accurate equipment and to provide information on the studio telecommunication equipment and services.

4) Participation of the Plaintiff and CPS staff members, and nonEL Hong Kong branch employees

As seen earlier, the Plaintiff’s business activities as nonELP subsidiaries are under the specific direction and control of nonELP, and does not bear any risk in carrying out the business. The Plaintiff also takes charge of installing, maintaining, and repairing the so-called Blstlerg’s exclusive team and a staff member who takes exclusive charge of the installation, maintenance, and repair of the so-called Blstlerg’s equipment and Blstlerg’s reception equipment, etc., and upon receiving work instructions from nonELP Hong Kong branch directly from nonELP Hong Kong Hong Kong branch (EDI system) and reports the results of the work directly to the nonELP Hong Hong Kong branch through computer, it is difficult to view the Plaintiff and SPS as an independent agent under the Korea-U.S. Tax Convention and the Corporate Tax Act. Moreover, it is difficult to deem that the four employees working at nonELS branch offices were performing the Plaintiff’s business activities such as providing information promotion service to the existing customers and customers, such as information promotion service, such as the Plaintiff’s information promotion service usage fees, etc. in Korea.

(D) Sub-committee

As seen above, it is reasonable to view that non-ELP had carried out fundamental and important business activities through personal participation in the Plaintiff and the SiPS employees and non-ELP Hong Kong branch with a fixed business place in Korea. As such, the Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant supply of services constitutes zero tax rate stipulated in Article 26(1)1 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act, on the premise that there exists a permanent establishment in the Republic of Korea and thus, the domestic establishment in non-ELP does not exist.

However, since the information collection service among the instant services is not provided to ELP through the domestic permanent establishment of ELP, but directly provided to ELP located in the United States without going through the domestic permanent establishment, it is subject to zero tax rate pursuant to Article 26(1)1-2 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act. Since each of the instant dispositions is subject to zero tax rate pursuant to Article 26(1)1-2 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act, the part related to the provision of the instant information collection service among the instant dispositions is revoked, but the submitted data alone cannot determine the part corresponding to the instant

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified, and all of them are accepted, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

[Attachment]

Judges Central Public-Private Partnership (Presiding Judge) Dozers