Cheongju District Court 2012Guhap527 ( November 08, 2012)

The plaintiff as an oligopolistic stockholder bears the secondary tax liability.

[Attachment to the contents of the judgment of the court of first instance] Since it is apparent that the plaintiff actually owned all the shares issued by the non-party company at the time of the establishment of the tax liability, the plaintiff bears the secondary tax liability as an oligopolistic shareholder, and the "person who actually exercises the rights to shares" is separate whether the management of the company is controlled.

(Cheongju)The revocation of the disposition of imposing value-added tax

CHAPTER A

Head of Dong District Office

Cheongju District Court Decision 2012Guhap527 Decided November 8, 2012

November 20, 2013

December 18, 2013

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The decision of the first instance court shall be revoked. The defendant's each taxation disposition that was stated in the attached tax disposition against the plaintiff on November 3, 2009 shall be revoked.

1. The part citing the judgment of the court of first instance

The reasoning for this Court regarding this case is as stated in the reasoning for the judgment of the court of first instance, except for adding the following judgments, and thus, this Court shall accept it as it is in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Additional determination

The Plaintiff asserts that this part of the taxation disposition is unlawful, since the tax liability established on March 31, 2009 for the value-added tax of 171, 2009, which was stated in the attached tax statement, lost the status of the oligopolistic shareholder of the non-party company on March 9, 2009.

However, Article 21(1)7 of the former Framework Act on National Taxes provides that the time when the establishment of value-added tax liability is completed when the taxable period is terminated, and Article 3(3) of the Value-Added Tax Act provides that the taxable period when the business is discontinued, shall be from the commencement date of the taxable period in which the business is discontinued to the date of discontinuance of the business. Thus, the establishment date of the non-party company’s liability to pay value-added tax for the first period of January 2009 is March 5, 2009, which is the date of discontinuance of

The above argument is without merit.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.