logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2016.01.20 2015누54201
부가가치세부과처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation of the instant case is as stated in the part of the first instance judgment except for the Plaintiff’s new argument, which is added by Paragraph 2 below, and thus, it shall be cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Additional determination

A. The instant disposition should be revoked on the ground that the Plaintiff’s assertion was unlawful.

1) According to Article 23(1) of the Value-Added Tax Act, the value-added tax on the import of goods shall be collected by the head of a customs office, not the head of a customs office, in the same manner as customs duties are collected. In addition, in a case where the Customs Act conflicts with the Framework Act on National Taxes pursuant to Article 4 of the Customs Act, the provisions of the Customs Act preferentially apply. According to Article 21 of the Customs Act, the exclusion period for imposition of value-added tax on the import of goods imposed and collected by the head of a customs office shall be two years from the date on which customs duties can be imposed. The disposition of this case was conducted with the lapse of two years. (2) The Plaintiff issued a tax invoice on the import of goods on which the head of a customs office bears value-added tax and deducted it as an input tax amount. However, even if the above tax invoice falls under

B. 1) Determination 1) We examine the authority to impose the instant disposition and the exclusion period, and the instant disposition is not the imposition and collection of the value-added tax on the import of the goods, but the rectification disposition on the first term portion in 2007 and the second term in 2007 reported by the Plaintiff, as seen earlier (the instant tax invoice is merely the portion of the input tax deduction among the value-added tax reported by the Plaintiff).

- old.

arrow