logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2015.04.09 2014두46089
부가가치세부과처분취소
Text

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined.

Article 26-2(1) of the former Framework Act on National Taxes (amended by Act No. 911, Jan. 1, 2010; hereinafter the same) provides that "ten years from the date on which national taxes may be imposed, if a taxpayer evades a national tax, or has a refund or deduction by fraudulent or other unlawful means," subparagraph 1 provides that "seven years from the date on which a national tax may be imposed, if a taxpayer fails to file a tax base return by the statutory due date of return," and subparagraph 2 provides that "five years from the date on which a national tax may be imposed, if a taxpayer does not fall under subparagraphs 1 and 2."

The lower court rejected all the Defendant’s assertion disputing the instant disposition on the grounds that: (a) the instant disposition on the imposition of value-added tax was unlawful, since five years have elapsed since the Plaintiff was subject to the exclusion period for the imposition of national taxes under Article 26-2(1)3 of the former Framework Act on National Taxes; and (b) the instant disposition on the imposition of value-added tax was unlawful since gold bullion was actually distributed and exported from the importer of the instant gold bullion to the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff was issued at each transaction stage, including the tax invoice, and since the Plaintiff’s act of receiving the refund or refund of value-added tax under the instant tax invoice does not constitute a case of receiving the refund or refund of national taxes through fraud or other unlawful act; (c) the application of Article 26-2(1)1 of the former Framework Act on National Taxes does not contravene the good faith principle; and (d) the application of Article 26-2(1)3 of the same Act does not violate the exclusion period for the

In light of the above provisions and relevant legal principles and records, the above determination by the court below is just, and contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, it is against the exclusion period for the imposition of national taxes.

arrow