The burden of proving the legitimacy of the estimate revision disposition

The method and contents of the estimation shall be to reflect the actual income amount near the truth in the case of estimation due to the reasons stipulated in Article 21 (2) 1 and 2 of the Value-Added Tax Act, and where the legitimacy of the estimation is disputed, the burden of proving its rationality and feasibility shall be imposed on the tax authorities.

Article 21 (2) 1 of the Value-Added Tax Act, Article 69 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, and Article 21-2 of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act

Plaintiff 1 and two others

head of Sung Dong Tax Office

Seoul High Court Decision 82Gu308 delivered on March 14, 1983

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

If there are reasons under Article 21 (2) 1 and 2 of the Value-Added Tax Act, the government may revise the estimation under the conditions as prescribed by the Presidential Decree, but the method and contents of the estimation shall be reasonable and reasonable to reflect the income loss near the truth. If there is a dispute over the legitimacy of the estimation taxation, the burden of proof of its rationality and validity shall be borne by the defendant who is the tax authority. In light of the records, the court below is justified in the determination that the defendant's disposition of this case, which calculated the tax amount to be 14 percent of the profits ratio of the plaintiff, is the estimation method which lacks rationality and validity, is the estimation method which lacks rationality and validity, and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles and incomplete deliberation such as the theory of lawsuit.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of the appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Lee Chang-chul (Presiding Justice)