[부가가치세부과처분취소][공1991.5.1.(895),1199]
A. In a case where construction work of underground road and shopping district facilities is completed and all facilities are donated to Busan Metropolitan City and Metropolitan City at the same time, and permission to occupy and use road is obtained for 20 years, whether the donation of the above facilities constitutes the supply of construction services under the Value-Added Tax Act (affirmative);
B. In the case of paragraph (a) above, whether the supply of goods or services exempt from value-added tax under Article 12 (1) 18 of the Value-Added Tax Act is applicable (negative)
A. In a case where the Plaintiff completed the construction of underground road and commercial facilities at the same time with the permission of the head of Busan Metropolitan City to implement an urban planning project and donated all the construction facilities to Busan Metropolitan City and Busan Metropolitan City, and the Plaintiff completed the construction with the permission of the occupation and use of the road and the permission of the installation of the structure for twenty (20) years, the ownership of the above underground road and commercial facilities shall not be reverted to the Busan Metropolitan City and Busan Metropolitan City by the Plaintiff’s donation and the collection of the fees from the Busan Metropolitan City and Busan Metropolitan City, but shall not be reverted to the Busan Metropolitan City and Busan Metropolitan City under the provisions of Article 83 of the Urban Planning Act.
B. In the case of paragraph (a) above, in order to save the budget and install public facilities, the Mayor of Busan Metropolitan City and the Mayor of Busan Metropolitan City shall complete the above underground passage and commercial building facilities and contribute them to the Busan Metropolitan City and the Mayor of Busan Metropolitan City as well as the right of free use for the part of commercial building facilities to the plaintiff. The plaintiff also recognized that the above donation and the acquisition of the above right of free use are in an economic quid pro quo relationship, and thus, the construction service of completion of the above underground facilities is supplied. Since the above free use is accompanied by a separate administrative disposition such as permission of road occupation and use, the above price is not denied, this cannot be said to be the supply of goods or services exempt from value-added tax under Article 12
(a) Articles 1(3) and 7(1) of the Value-Added Tax Act, Article 2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act, Articles 24(1) and 83(2) of the Urban Planning Act;
Supreme Court Decision 89Nu3496 delivered on April 13, 1990 (Gong1990, 1090) 89Nu596 delivered on April 27, 1990 (Gong1990, 1180), Supreme Court Decision 90Nu6842 delivered on December 21, 1990 (Gong191,657)
Attorney Park Jong-young, Counsel for the defendant-appellant-appellee
The director of Busan District Office
Busan High Court Decision 88Gu1936 delivered on July 25, 1990
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.
The Plaintiff’s attorney’s ground of appeal is examined.
According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, the non-party 1, 1984.4. 9. The non-party 1, 1984. The non-party 2's manager of the Busan Metropolitan City Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the "public land") was permitted to execute the urban planning project between the non-party 1, Busan Metropolitan City Co., Ltd., and the non-party 1, 208. The non-party 8's construction cost of the above public land and the non-party 8's construction cost of the above public land, which is the non-party 8's construction cost of the above public land. The non-party 1, 208's construction cost of the above public land, which is the non-party 1, 300's construction cost of the above public land and the non-party 8's construction cost of the above public land, which is the non-party 1,000's construction cost of the above public land.
Therefore, the appeal is dismissed and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.
Justices Song Man-man (Presiding Justice)