logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2015.12.18 2014구합58686
법인세 및 부가가치세 처분취소의 소
Text

1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff, a key telecommunications business operator, changed the name of the company to the Comcom after the KT Co., Ltd. and the Telecom Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “ST”), and the Telecom Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “LT”), and changed its trade name to the LB, Inc., Ltd. after combining the Telecom Co., Ltd. and the Telecom Co., Ltd. (ELT).

After the global tax communication, the trade name was changed to the Onnuri Telecom Co., Ltd. (after that, the merger was made to the Yucom Co., Ltd., but the merged corporation had its trade name changed to the Onnuri Telecom), and the Sejong Telecom Co., Ltd. combined the Onnuri Telecom.

(hereinafter referred to as “Onse Communications,” and each telephone information service contract (hereinafter referred to as “the instant contract”) was concluded with the case, telephone, etc., respectively, and provided telephone information service (hereinafter referred to as “the instant contract”) to the information users using a 060-line network of a key telecommunications business operator, such as voice gathering, securities information, and transport consultation (hereinafter referred to as “instant service”). A corporation has reported and paid corporate tax and value-added tax on the amount of the tax invoice issued by the purchaser, etc. reversely, using the amount of issuance of the tax invoice as the tax base under the Corporate Tax Act and the Value-Added Tax Act.

B. The Plaintiff reported and paid the value-added tax base and tax amount from the second to the second period of 2006 to the second period of 2009, and included the information usage fee for the provision of telephone information services through the wireless telephone in the tax base, but the information usage fee following the provision of telephone information services through the wireless telephone was omitted from the tax base.

In addition, the Plaintiff reported and paid the corporate tax base and tax amount from 2006 to 2009, and included the amount of information usage fees due to the provision of telephone information services through radio telephone, but also included in the amount of income.

arrow