The adequacy of taxation by the method of estimating gross sales by applying the average value-added rate on the value-added tax by type of business and regional office and the extension rate table prepared by the Commissioner of the National Tax Service (negative)

In the case of estimated taxation, the method of estimation shall be reasonable and reasonable so as to reflect the actual amount close to the truth as far as possible, and it shall be legitimate only if it falls under any one of the estimation methods stipulated in Article 69 of the Enforcement Decree of the Enforcement Decree of the Tax Act. Thus, the average value-added rate specified in the table of value-added tax by type of business, local government office, and the extension rate prepared by the Commissioner of the National Tax Service to use it as the data for the selection criteria of faithful business operators shall not be deemed to be the "total value-added rate determined by type of business by the Commissioner of the National Tax Service or the director of the competent regional tax office" as provided in Article 69 (1) 4 (d) of the Enforcement Decree of the Tax Act, and it shall not be deemed to be the "total value-added rate determined by type of business by the Commissioner of the National Tax Service or the Commissioner of the competent Regional Tax Office" provided in subparagraph 3 of the same paragraph, and it shall not be deemed to be any other estimation method provided for in Article 69 of the above Enforcement Decree.

Article 21(2) of the Value-Added Tax Act, Article 69 of the Enforcement Decree thereof

Park Jong-gu, Attorneys Kim Won-sung et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant

Head of Gwangju District Tax Office

Seoul High Court Decision 86Gu1277 delivered on November 21, 1989

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The defendant's grounds of appeal are examined.

The lower court determined that: (a) the Plaintiff, who operated a business for manufacturing, exporting, or selling goods by category of 30 different business, did not constitute an average value-added tax rate of KRW 50 per annum; (b) the Defendant attempted to conduct an inventory inspection to impose value-added tax on the Plaintiff’s inventory goods but could not conduct an inventory inspection; (c) there was no necessary investigation, account books, or other evidence for calculating the tax base; (d) the amount of value-added tax shall be determined by the method of calculating the tax base and the estimated tax base for value-added tax for the pertinent period of 1981 to 200 won; (d) the amount calculated by adding the above estimated value-added tax base to KRW 70 per annum 60 per annum; (e) the average value-added tax base of KRW 80 per annum 60 per annum; and (e) the amount calculated by adding the estimated value-added tax base and the estimated value-added tax base of KRW 40 per category 60 to the second period of 1985.

In light of relevant evidence, records, and the provisions of relevant Acts and subordinate statutes, the above judgment of the court below is justified.

The issue is that the judgment of the court below is removed from its independent opinion, and cannot be accepted.

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

Justices Lee Jae-sung (Presiding Justice)