The meaning of a person who supplies goods or services independently from the business under Article 2 (1) of the Value-Added Tax Act.

Since value-added tax is imposed on the value added at each stage of production and distribution, a person who supplies goods or services independently from the business under Article 2(1) of the Value-Added Tax Act, which provides for a taxpayer of value-added tax, must be treated as a person who continuously and repeatedly supplies goods or services in the form of business to create a value-added.

Article 2 (1) of the Value-Added Tax Act

Supreme Court Decision 86Nu216 Decided September 9, 1986

Plaintiff 1 and 13 others, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellee

The director of the Southern Incheon District Office

Seoul High Court Decision 85Gu1061 Decided July 16, 1986

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

Since value-added tax is imposed on the value added at each stage of production and distribution, a person who supplies goods or services independently from the business under Article 2(1) of the Value-Added Tax Act, which provides for a taxpayer of value-added tax, shall be treated as a person who continues to create a value-added and who provides goods or services with repeated intent (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 86Nu216, Sept. 9, 1986).

According to the reasoning of the original adjudication, the court below recognized the fact that the plaintiffs purchased the land that the non-party formed and divided into the housing site and newly built a building including a house in order to reside there in this area, and that they were transferred to each other due to the lack of financial standing, etc., and the plaintiffs do not constitute a person who supplies goods independently from the business under the Value-Added Tax Act, and therefore, the defendant's taxation of this case against the construction and transfer of the above house is unlawful. The judgment of the court below is just and there is no error in finding facts in violation of the rules of evidence, such as the theory of lawsuit, or there is no omission of incomplete deliberation or misapprehension of legal principles. Accordingly, all arguments are without merit.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Osung-hwan (Presiding Justice)