logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2019.04.23 2018다287287
부당이득금
Text

The judgment below is reversed and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined.

In order to say that the criteria for judgment on the invalidity of a taxation disposition is a void as a matter of course, the fact that there is an illegality in the disposition is insufficient, and that the defect is objectively obvious and serious as it violates the important part of the law. In order to determine whether the defect is significant and obvious, it is necessary to consider the function of the law which serves as the basis for the taxation disposition as an objective theory and to consider the characteristics of the specific case itself reasonably.

In addition, in a case where a tax disposition was made by applying the provisions of a certain law to a certain legal relationship or fact, the legal doctrine clearly stating that the provisions of the law are not applicable to such legal relation or fact, and thus there is no room for dispute over interpretation, if the tax authority imposed a tax disposition by applying the provisions of the law, the defect is grave and obvious. However, if there is room for dispute over interpretation because the legal principle that the provisions of the law are not applicable to such legal relation or fact clearly shows, it is not clear that there is no possibility for dispute

It cannot be said that the defect is obvious because it is merely a mistake of the fact.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2017Da242409 Decided July 19, 2018 (see Supreme Court en banc Decision 2017Da242409, Jul. 19, 2018). Meanwhile, even though the meaning of the requirements for taxation in the language and text of the statutory provisions is clear, there is no room for dispute over the interpretation because the legal principles are not clearly revealed if the pertinent disposition was conducted

(See Supreme Court Decision 2011Du27094 Decided May 16, 2014). 2. The clarity of the interpretation of relevant statutes

A. The former Restriction of Special Local Taxation Act was amended by Act No. 11487, Oct. 12, 2012.

arrow