This case’s subsidy is subject to taxation, which is paid directly related to the supply of the service.

Since it is reasonable to deem that the instant subsidy is paid in direct connection with the Plaintiff’s provision of the service, the instant subsidy does not constitute a national subsidy and a public subsidy excluded from value-added tax assessment, and the Plaintiff’s assertion is groundless

Article 1 of the Value-Added Tax Act

2013 disposition of revocation of imposition of value-added tax

AAAA

○ Head of tax office

November 27, 2013

January 15, 2014

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Cheong-gu Office

The imposition of value-added tax for the second period of 201 on May 1, 2012 by the Defendant against the Plaintiff on May 1, 2012 is revoked.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is a digital content development company that develops regional products design and animation character, etc.

B. The Plaintiff’s input tax amount ○○○○ at the time of filing a value-added tax declaration on the second quarter of 2011 to the Defendant.

Upon reporting the refund, the Defendant conducted on-site investigations for refund of value-added tax, and the Defendant as a result thereof.

A. On August 4, 2011, the Plaintiff entered into a project agreement with BBBB (hereinafter “instant corporation”) on the Support Project of the Local Culture Industry Center (CRC) and received a subsidy of KRW 00 million from the instant corporation (hereinafter “instant subsidy”). On May 1, 2012, the Plaintiff notified the Plaintiff of KRW 32,524,130 of the value-added tax for the portion omitted sales for the second period of 201 (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

Facts that there is no dispute with recognition, Gap Nos. 1, 3, and Eul No. 1 (if any, bl.);

each entry and the purport of the whole pleading.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The local cultural industry research center support project is (CRC) the instant corporation intends to support the local company as a management agency of the foregoing business with the budget support from the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism and the Jeju Special Self-Governing Province and to foster the regional related industry by supporting the local company. The instant subsidy is a type of provision that erroneously states that the Plaintiff’s business should be subsidized and the result of the project intangible under the above agreement shall be owned by the instant corporation. As such, the instant subsidy cannot be deemed a supply of services subject to value-added tax, and constitutes a national subsidy and a public subsidy not included in the value-added tax base. Accordingly, the instant disposition based on

(b) Related statutes;

It is as shown in the attached Form.

C. Determination

1) Facts of recognition

A) On June 10, 201, the instant corporation: (a) as part of the regional cultural industry research center support project (hereinafter “instant project”) promoting the establishment of an industry, academic, and research cooperative system for the development of the regional cultural industry and the support for the development of local specialized cultural products; and (b) announced the selection of an executing institution for the task of “production of Jeju Clean Resources four Content” as follows.

B) The instant corporation selected the Plaintiff as an executing institution for the task described in the instant paragraph (1). Accordingly, on August 4, 2011, the Plaintiff entered into the instant project task agreement with the instant corporation (hereinafter “instant agreement”) as follows.

Facts that there is no dispute over recognition, entry of Gap No. 4 and 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2) Determination

(5) According to Article 13(2)4 of the former Value-Added Tax Act (amended by Act No. 1129, Dec. 31, 201; hereinafter referred to as the “Act”), the Plaintiff’s portion of the instant subsidy to be paid to the Plaintiff for the purpose of using the instant subsidy to be non-taxable or non-taxable research projects is one of the items that are not included in the tax base of the imposed value-added tax. According to Article 48(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Act (amended by Act No. 23527, Jan. 25, 2012; hereinafter the same), the Plaintiff’s portion of the instant subsidy to be paid to the Plaintiff for non-taxable research or non-taxable research projects, including the fact that the Plaintiff’s portion of the instant subsidy to be paid for non-taxable research or non-taxable research projects, which is not deemed to be owned by the Plaintiff for the purpose of developing the instant subsidy to be owned by the Plaintiff and non-taxable research entity.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.