Suwon District Court-2015-Guhap-3127 ( October 11, 2016)

Determination of the time of supply for the yacht sales agency service and the time of accrual of earnings;

Since the content of the instant service is limited to the conclusion of a sales contract for a yacht, it shall be deemed that the time of conclusion of the sales contract is the time of supply for the services for sales agency, and it shall be deemed that the year of accrual of earnings (the same conclusion as the judgment of the first instance) is the same

Article 9 of the former Value-Added Tax Act (Amended by Act No. 10409, Dec. 27, 2010)

2016Nu70644 and revocation of disposition of imposing the value-added tax and the corporate tax.

Ho****

*The Director of the Tax Office

Suwon District Court Decision 2015Guhap3127 Decided October 11, 2016

April 11, 2017

May 16, 2017

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The judgment of the court of first instance is revoked. Each disposition taken by the Defendant against the Plaintiff on January 14, 2015, including value-added tax of KRW 110,634,00 for the second term of 209 and corporate tax of KRW 178,684,00 for the business year 209, shall be revoked.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasoning for the judgment in this case is as stated in the reasoning for the judgment of the court of first instance except for the parts added or used by the court below, and thus, they are cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

○ At the second bottom of the judgment of the first instance court, the following shall be added:

Among them, the agreement on the payment method of yachts in this case is as follows.

○ Written judgment of the first instance court 2 '........' '......... the following shall be applied:

C. On the same day, the Plaintiff agreed to receive KRW 1.4 billion from the sales agency fees for the instant yachts on December 20, 2009, and paid KRW 660 million on February 28, 2010, and paid KRW 740 million from the remainder on February 28, 2010. However, the Plaintiff agreed to immediately pay the said fees to the Plaintiff upon receiving the payment from the BB development at the time of payment.

○ 5 at the bottom of the 7th judgment of the first instance court, 'not less than 5', shall add the following:

The Plaintiff asserted that the first payment date of the sales agency fee is as of December 20, 2009, the second payment date of the sales agency fee of the sales agency fee of the previous sales contract, and the remainder payment date of the sales agency fee is specified as the following day of February 27, 2010, which is the remainder payment date of the sales agency fee of the previous sales contract of the previous sales agency. However, it is difficult to recognize that the agreement on the payment date alone stipulates that the payment of the sales agency fee of the instant yacht is a condition attached to the payment of the sales agency fee of the sales agency fee of the instant case. Moreover, it is difficult to believe that the testimony by the witness of the current court to the effect that the payment of the sales agency fee of the remainder payment is made in light of the terms of the sales agency fee payment agreement of the instant

○ The judgment of the first instance court is 8 4 'the same for 8 pages', but the following shall be added:

(A) The plaintiff argues that the above contract constitutes an acceptance of a contract, not an assignment of claims, but an acceptance of the above claim in light of the language and text of the above contract.

○ The judgment of the first instance court No. 8 shall be executed on the 8th page, and the following shall be added:

Likewise, even if the sales agency fee was reduced to KRW 600 million in 2012, this is only an circumstance after the Plaintiff’s sales agency supply was completed.

2. Conclusion

Therefore, the judgment of the first instance court is justifiable, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit.