Seoul Administrative Court-2017-Gu Partnership-81526 (2018.05)

Appellate Court 2017Su2344 (Law No. 2017.07.20)

The balcony expansion project is a separate tax service that is not a part of the apartment construction services that is a tax-free apartment.

It is reasonable to view that the balcony expansion construction is a part of the apartment construction services, which is a tax-free apartment, and that it falls under a separate taxation service separate from the above construction services.

Article 106 of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act

Seoul High Court-2018-Nu-57362 Such revocation as value-added tax, etc.

a

s. Tax office et al.

July 5, 2018

April 3, 2019

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The judgment of the first instance court shall be revoked. Each copy of the attached Form [Attachment] written by the Defendants against the Plaintiff on January 11, 2017.

The imposition of a value tax and a corporate tax (including additional tax) shall be revoked in all.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act, civil action, because the reasoning of the judgment of this court is the same as that of the judgment of the first instance.

The grounds for appeal by the plaintiff are cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Transmission Act (the grounds for appeal by the plaintiff are in the first instance court).

The main issue, that is, ① the instant balcony Expansion Corporation’s construction services and all tax exemption;

Whether this case's balcony expansion corporation constitutes services and ② This case's balcony expansion corporation is exempt from value-added tax.

1. As to the assertion in the first instance of the first instance as to whether there exists a justifiable reason for the mistake that it is reasonable

There is no big difference between the plaintiff and the first instance court, even if examining the plaintiff's argument in the trial.

Provided that it shall be recognized as legitimate.

2. Conclusion

Therefore, the judgment of the court of first instance is justifiable, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.

section 3.