beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On January 17, 2007, Nonparty B contracted the construction of a multi-family house (hereinafter “instant building”) on the ground D in Ansan-gu, Ansan-si (hereinafter “instant building”) from Nonparty C, but B renounced the said construction on July 10, 2007.
B. On July 10, 2007, the Plaintiff succeeded to the instant construction project from B, and entered into a construction contract (hereinafter “instant construction contract”) with C as “the date of commencement, July 16, 2007”; “the date of completion, Sept. 30, 2007”; “the date of completion, Sept. 30, 2007”; “390,000,000 won (excluding value-added tax)”; and “the period of defect liability” (hereinafter “instant construction contract”). After completion, the Plaintiff completed the instant building and obtained approval for use on October 29, 2012.
C. As the Plaintiff did not pay the instant construction cost on the ground of the construction defect, etc., the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against C seeking construction cost. From the appellate court (Seoul High Court 2010Na81140), the conciliation was concluded on January 3, 2012, and on November 13, 2012, the Plaintiff received KRW 308,000,000 as the title of the instant construction cost from C.
C On November 13, 2012, when filing a transfer income tax on the transfer of the instant building, C reported the said KRW 308,000,000 to the acquisition value, and the head of Ansan Tax Office notified the Defendant of the taxation data that the Plaintiff did not report or pay the value-added tax on the provision of the instant construction (construction) services.
E. Accordingly, on February 3, 2014, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the rectification of the value-added tax of KRW 39,264,400 (including the additional tax of KRW 11,264,40,400) on the construction cost of the instant case against the Plaintiff on February 3, 2014, by deeming the Plaintiff as an unregistered business operator.
(f) The Plaintiff, who was dissatisfied with the instant disposition, filed an objection on April 16, 2014, but was dismissed on May 15, 2014, and filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal on August 13, 2014, but was dismissed on March 23, 2014.
[Ground of Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 to 4, and Eul No. 1 to 1.