2015 depth987 ( December 24, 2015)

The civil judgment submitted by the informant as evidentiary materials at the time of reporting the tax evasion constitutes "important materials".

It is reasonable to view that the capital gains tax that was easily omitted without any cost and effort through a civil judgment was able to be collected in addition to the "material material stating specific facts under Article 84-2 (2) 1 (a) of the Framework Act on National Taxes" which constitutes "material material under Article 84-2 (1) 1 of the same Act."

Payment of rewards under Article 84-2 of the Framework Act on National Taxes

2016Guhap132 The revocation of revocation of the refusal to pay a reward

IsaA

BB Director of the Tax Office

April 6, 2017

May 11, 2017

1. The Defendant’s refusal to pay a monetary reward to the Plaintiff on March 10, 2015 is revoked.

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

Cheong-gu Office

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On October 00, 000, the plaintiff filed a tax evasion report with the Seoul Central District Court Decision 2012Gahap0000 (hereinafter referred to as "the civil judgment in this case"), which is a related civil case, on the following grounds: on October 00, 000, the plaintiff sold 00 USOdong 00 parcels (hereinafter referred to as "OOOOO") to OOOOO (hereinafter referred to as "OOOOOO") on October 00, 200, the plaintiff submitted a written judgment in Seoul Central District Court 201Kahap00 (hereinafter referred to as "the civil judgment in this case"), and OOdong 582-5 (hereinafter referred to as "OOdong 582-5 (hereinafter referred to as "the copy of this case") (hereinafter referred to as "the report in this case", and the document in this case is referred to as "the report in this case").

B. From October 0, 000 to October 00 of the same year, the defendant conducted a tax investigation (hereinafter referred to as "tax investigation of this case") on the KimB (hereinafter referred to as "Gla, etc.") of the KimA and KimB (hereinafter referred to as "GlaB"), and as a result of such tax investigation on October 00, 000, the defendant corrected and notified the transfer income tax of 000 to KimA, etc., respectively.

C. The Plaintiff applied for the payment of monetary rewards to the Defendant on October 0, 000, but the Defendant notified the Defendant that it would refuse the payment of monetary rewards under the above provision on the ground that the instant report on tax evasion does not constitute “material material pursuant to Article 84-2 of the Framework Act on National Taxes and Article 65-4 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act” (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Reasons for Recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including branch numbers, hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The civil judgment of this case submitted by the Plaintiff at the time of the report on the tax evasion of this case and the copy of the register of this case contain specific facts, such as the customer, date of transaction, transaction items, and transaction amount, which can confirm the omission of capital gains tax by KimA, and if the Plaintiff did not submit the above materials to the Defendant, the taxation could not be made against KimA, etc. Therefore, the above materials constitute "important materials" under Article 84-2 of the Framework Act on National Taxes. Therefore, the disposition of this

B. Relevant statutes

The entries in the attached Table-related statutes are as follows.

C. Determination

1) Article 84-2(1)1 of the former Framework Act on National Taxes (amended by Act No. 12848, Dec. 23, 2014; hereinafter the same) provides that "the Commissioner of the National Tax Service may pay a monetary reward not exceeding two billion won to a person who provides material in calculating the tax evasion amount or the amount of tax unjustly refunded or deducted." Article 84-2(2)1 of the same Act provides that "The Commissioner of the National Tax Service may pay a monetary reward not exceeding two billion won to a person who provides material in calculating the amount of tax evasion or the amount of tax unjustly refunded or deducted." Article 84-2(1)1 of the same Act provides that "the date of transaction or transaction, transaction items, transaction volume, and amount, etc. that can verify the details of tax evasion or illegally refunded or deducted."

The purpose of the Framework Act on National Taxes is to provide a reward to a person who has provided important data in calculating the tax evasion amount. If the tax authority receives specific data that can verify the fact of tax evasion under the realistic circumstances where the tax authority cannot investigate the tax evasion in good faith, the tax authority can collect the tax evasion amount easily without much cost and effort. Furthermore, if the information on the tax evasion is activated, the tax authority can create a climate of tax evasion in good faith. Therefore, the tax evasion amount can be promoted, and compensation and encouragement can be provided by paying a reward to a person who provided information meeting certain requirements in relation to the tax evasion. Therefore, the "important data subject to a reward" should include specific data that can relatively facilitate the fact of tax evasion, such as Article 84-2(2) of the Framework Act on National Taxes and Article 65-4(11) of the Enforcement Decree of the Framework Act on National Taxes. If the provided data is merely a mere point of confirming the possibility of tax evasion, a suspicion of tax evasion, a simple rumor, etc., it is difficult for the tax authority to verify the fact of tax evasion.

2) Each of the following facts may be acknowledged either as a dispute between the parties, or as a whole by taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings in the descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 5, and Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 4:

(1) The details of the report on the instant tax evasion are as follows:

Report on Tax Evasion

(b)

○ Tax evasions of this case

KimAA (*******************)**)

OOO-gu OO-dong 00 OOO apartment 000-00

(hereinafter referred to as "tax payer")

○ Facts of tax evasion of this case

On October 00, 00, the above tax evasion agent transferred the OO-dong 582-5 and 00 square meters of 00 square meters of O-dong, OO-dong, to OO-O-O as an apartment site (hereinafter “the instant transaction”). The taxpayer evaded taxes by underreporting the transfer tax by underreporting the transfer tax. However, even though this fact was in the process of litigation, the judgment of the court of first instance became final and conclusive as it became final and conclusive, and the time for thoroughly investigating the relevant material.

(hereinafter omitted)

② The contents of the civil judgment of this case are as follows.

2012Return of unjust enrichment, etc.

AAAA

BBB

(b)

1. Basic facts

(b)

B. In around 000, the Defendant established and operated D Co., Ltd., a village bus company, and purchased OO E E 00 square meters from around 000 to around 000, F 00 square meters, G 00 square meters (hereinafter “the Defendant’s land within the instant civil judgment”). The land located in the above E and F was used as a bus stop, and the land located in G was used as a bus company’s office and housing site.

C. The plaintiff purchased the land (in the civil judgment of this case, "the reconstruction land of this case" within the meaning of "the reconstruction household of this case") in neighboring 00 households, including the land of the defendant in this case (hereinafter referred to as "the reconstruction household of this case") to promote reconstruction. The rebuilding process was conducted at the request of the reconstruction household of this case to appraise the market price of the reconstruction land of this case. The reconstruction household of this case satisfies the reconstruction promotion committee around October 000, and appointed the defendant as the chairperson of the promotion committee.

D. On October 0, 000, the Plaintiff prepared a sales contract with the Defendant that the Plaintiff purchases the Defendant’s land at KRW 000 (hereinafter “the sales contract of this case within the civil judgment of this case”) as part of the rebuilding land purchase work, and on the same day, the Plaintiff paid KRW 00 to the Defendant.

(b)

F. The Defendant returned KRW 000,000,000,000,000 to the Plaintiff from October 0, 000 to October 0, 00, out of the amount received as stated in the above D.

(b)

H. On October 00, 000, the Plaintiff is required to receive a loan of KRW 00 billion from the OF Capital Stock Company, etc. through the OFEO Securities Company, etc., under the pretext of the purchase cost of the instant land for reconstruction.

1. In order to incorporate the Defendant’s land into a business site, the Plaintiff shall pay the Defendant KRW 0 billion to the new bank account on the execution date of the development project, and the Defendant shall receive payment of KRW 0 billion, and at the same time deliver documents necessary for the registration of the transfer of the ownership of the present garage to the certified judicial scrivener designated by the Plaintiff.

2. Although the Plaintiff completed the preparation necessary to transfer KRW 0 billion pursuant to paragraph (1), if the Defendant fails to transfer the ownership of the present garage to the Plaintiff, such as not delivering documents necessary for the registration of the transfer of the ownership of the present garage to the certified judicial scrivener designated by the Plaintiff, the Defendant shall compensate the Plaintiff for the KRW 0 billion within 0 billion.

3. If the Plaintiff fails to transfer KRW 0 billion to the Defendant even though the Defendant completed all preparations to transfer the ownership of the present garage to a certified judicial scrivener designated by the Plaintiff, such as delivering documents necessary for the registration of the transfer of the ownership of the garage to the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff shall compensate the Defendant for the KRW 0 billion within 0 days.

The PF loan agreement was concluded between the above company and the company.

I. On October 00, 000, the Plaintiff entered into an agreement with the Defendant regarding the sale and purchase of the Defendant’s land (hereinafter “instant agreement”) as follows, and paid KRW 000 to the Defendant on October 00, 00, and the Defendant completed each registration of the transfer of ownership with respect to the Defendant’s land on the same day.

③ The Plaintiff entered “OOO” in the part of the Plaintiff’s civil judgment of this case, and submitted it to the Defendant by stating “GlaA” in the part of the Defendant.

④ Plaintiff OOO appealed the above judgment as OOsi High Court 000Na0000, but the appellate court rendered a judgment dismissing the appeal on October 00, 000, which became final and conclusive on October 00, 000.

⑤ After conducting a tax investigation with respect to KimA and KimB, the Defendant prepared a report on the completion of the investigation as follows (hereinafter “report on the completion of the investigation”).

Report on completion of investigation of capital gains tax;

(b)

VII. Details of the investigation

(b)

2. Confirmation of transfer value:

After confirming relevant documents such as the judgment, the transferor KimA transfers 000,000 parcels and 000-000 parcels of land owned by his own KimB to OO on October 00, 000, used as the location of OO traffic as the representative of the State;

○ On October 0, 000, the transfer value of 0 billion won is confirmed to have been prepared in a formal transfer contract between the two parties with the transfer value of 0 billion won and refunded KRW 000,000,000 upon the request of the OOO by receiving KRW 000,000 as the down payment and intermediate payment.

It is confirmed that there was a notarized performance statement under the condition that the land will be ordered to be used as a village bus garage so that the business can continue to be operated other than the two transfer contracts.

○OO agrees to pay KRW 0 billion as the purchase of the alternative site promised is not smooth, and it deposits KRW 000 with the KimA 00 bank account on October 0, 000 and transfers ownership.

○ The first sale contract is similar to the exchange contract between the substitute land and the transferred land rather than the simple sale contract, and KimA recognizes that KimA receives 000 won for the land which can substitute the land owned by the principal and his own KimB with the original account.

After preparing a false transfer contract and filing a false report on the transfer tax, the transfer tax was determined only as the transfer value stated in the transfer contract even if there were such circumstances at the time of the transfer investigation on October 1, 000, and the additional money was known as an agreement for the maintenance of business by each letter, not as related to the transfer. Therefore, the claim that the transfer tax was not illegal tax evasion.

(hereinafter omitted)

④ The Defendant, an owner of KimA, reported the transfer value of the OO-dong 000 square meters in O-dong 000 square meters in O-dong 000 square meters in the same 000 square meters, and the transfer value of the same 000 square meters in the same 000 square meters in KimB as KRW 000, and notified KimA and KimB of the transfer income tax for 000 square meters in relation to KimB.

7. The defendant submitted data on the representation of a lawsuit from the Court Administration Office. The data contain the name, case number, case name, name and resident registration number of the party concerned, date of judgment, results of adjudication, etc. of the attorney.

3) According to the above facts of recognition, the following circumstances are revealed.

① According to the instant report on tax evasion submitted by the Plaintiff to the Defendant, the instant civil judgment, and the copy of the instant registry (hereinafter “the Plaintiff’s submission”), the parties to the instant transaction are KimAAOOOO, the transaction date of the instant transaction was October 0, 000. The object of the instant transaction is 00 square meters and more than 00 square meters, and the date of birth and address of KimAAA. In particular, the transfer value of the instant transaction, which is a key part of the imposition of capital gains tax on the instant transaction, is 00 square meters in total.

② However, according to the data submitted by the Plaintiff, the object of the instant transaction, other than OO-Gu O-dong O-dong 582-5, was not specified in detail. However, in light of the fact that the land category and size of the object of the instant transaction other than the said land are specified, and that the object of the instant transaction can be known that the land used by the bus company operated by KimA-dong was adjacent to the said land, the Defendant could easily confirm the object of the instant transaction other than the said land.

③ There is no content as to whether or not KimA reported the transfer value in relation to the transfer income tax in relation to the data submitted by the Plaintiff. However, this is merely an incidental information that the Defendant is aware of the details of the report by KimA.

④ Unless there exist special circumstances, a final and conclusive civil judgment is reliable as a valuable evidence of transactions subject to taxation for which the judgment was established, barring special circumstances (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 94Da52768, Oct. 12, 1995; 2008Da48964, 48971, Mar. 26, 2009). Thus, it is difficult to view that the civil judgment of this case, which contains specific contents on the instant transaction, is merely a point of view of the possibility of tax evasion, an assertion of conical suspicion, and collection of simple rumors.

⑤ According to the instant report on the completion of the investigation prepared by the Defendant, the Defendant appears to have used the instant civil judgment as an important material, and the content of the report is also the same as the instant civil judgment, if it excludes that the amount of 00 m200 m2,000 OO2,00 among the instant land is owned by KimB.

④ The Defendant, an owner of Kim A, reported the transfer value of 00 m2,000 m2,000 m2,000 m2,000 m2, which is 000 m2,000 m2, and the transfer value of 000 m2,000 m2, which is the owner of Kim A, as KRW 000,000, and notified Kim A, respectively, of the transfer income tax belonging to 000 m2. The sum of the transfer value is the same as the transfer value of the instant transaction according to the instant civil judgment.

7) After receiving the report from the Plaintiff on the instant tax evasion, the Defendant imposed capital gains tax after securing data by conducting a tax investigation with respect to KimA, etc., but such tax investigation is merely an ordinary procedure following the instant report on the instant tax evasion, as well as an ordinary procedure following the instant report on the instant tax evasion. In light of the aforementioned factors, it seems that the instant report on the instant tax evasion is insufficient to re-

(8) Although the Defendant investigated the under-reported report of capital gains tax in relation to the instant transaction on or around October 000, the actual transfer value, etc. of the instant transaction was not confirmed. The data that the Defendant received from the National Court Administration stated in the name, case number, name of the party, the name of the party concerned, resident registration number, date of judgment, and the result of adjudication, etc. of the Plaintiff’s agent, and thus, it cannot be confirmed that the transfer value of the instant transaction cannot be verified. While the Defendant can obtain a written civil judgment through certain procedures, it is virtually impossible to investigate all the judgment sentenced by the court. However, even though the civil judgment of this case became final and conclusive, it is practically impossible for the Defendant to know the content of the instant transaction only after the Plaintiff submitted the data to the Plaintiff, and to conduct the tax investigation of this case. In light of the above, it is not probable that the Defendant commenced the instant tax investigation without the Plaintiff’s submission, and it is not likely that the Defendant knew or could have known any other way through the transfer income tax evasion related to the instant transaction.

4) In light of the facts acknowledged earlier and the above overall circumstances, it is reasonable to deem that the Defendant could collect capital gains tax, which was easily omitted by KimA, etc., without taking many costs and efforts through the data submitted by the Plaintiff. Ultimately, the data submitted by the Plaintiff constitutes “material material as stipulated in Article 84-2(2)1 of the former Framework Act on National Taxes” as “the material stating specific facts, such as transaction partners, transaction dates or transaction periods, transaction items, transaction volume, and amount, etc., which can confirm the tax evasion or the contents unfairly refunded or deducted pursuant to Article 84-2(2)1(a) of the former Framework Act on National Taxes.”

5) The Plaintiff’s assertion is reasonable, and the instant disposition is unlawful on a different premise.

3. Conclusion

The claim of this case is legitimate, and it is so accepted as per Disposition.