logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2015.07.10 2014구합19421
부가가치세부과처분취소
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 September 24, 2001, the Plaintiff (at the time, a trade name was Lane. On October 30, 2008, the company was changed to a wind window, Inc., and was changed to the Plaintiff on April 3, 2015; hereinafter “Plaintiff”) reported a remote education-type lifelong educational establishment in accordance with the Lifelong Education Act.

B. The Plaintiff established a window Glish Phone, Inc., Plaintiff’s shareholding ratio 99.99%) a windowphone (Wlish Phone, Inc., Plaintiff’s shareholding ratio 99.30%) in the Philippines (hereinafter “overseas subsidiaries”), and through overseas subsidiaries, employs local English instructors in the Philippines and provides domestic students with telephone English lectures.

60,101,242 won 837,501,060 won 1,015,606,881 won 1,362,046,837,837,481,213 won 4,912,737,232 won in 2011, 2012

C. The Plaintiff paid KRW 4,912,737,232 to overseas subsidiaries during the period from 2008 to 2009 as follows.

On June 3, 2013, the Defendant collected and paid the value-added tax pursuant to Article 52 of the Value-Added Tax Act when the Plaintiff pays such consideration to a foreign subsidiary without a domestic place of business as above; on the ground that the value-added tax was not collected and paid for the second period of 2008; value-added tax 28,472,470 for the second period of 209; value-added tax 5,658,310 for the second period of 209; value-added tax 51,735,470 for the first period of 2010; value-added tax 50,286,850 for the second period of 2010; value-added tax 62,835,50 for the first period of 2011; value-added tax 28,470 for the second period of 209; and 38,2018; 2018,2010 for the second period of 201.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”) e.

The plaintiff filed a request for review with the Board of Audit and Inspection on August 22, 2013, but was dismissed on August 6, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 6 through 8, the purport of the whole pleadings.

arrow