Seoul Administrative Court 2012Guhap27909 ( December 07, 2012)

Cho High Court Decision 2012west005 (No. 31, 2012)

Correction of value-added tax, etc. related to rent for a lessor does not constitute grounds for filing a subsequent claim for correction by the lessee.

The Defendant’s rectification of the value-added tax and the comprehensive income tax of the lessor is merely a correction of the revenue amount of the under-reported rent, and cannot be deemed to have changed the ownership of the income from the rent, and the circumstances following the under-reported return of the necessary rent fall under the grounds for ordinary correction claim, and does not fall under the grounds for subsequent request

2013Nu1166 Revocation of revocation of a request for rectification

KimAAA

Head of Yongsan Tax Office

Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2012Guhap27909 decided December 7, 2012

May 10, 2013

June 7, 2013

The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked. The part concerning the global income tax for the year 202 through 2005 shall be revoked among the disposition rejecting a correction request made by the defendant against the plaintiff on August 23, 2011.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasons for this judgment are as stated in the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the part on the 5th to 6th page 1 of the judgment of the court of first instance, as described in the following paragraph (2).

2. Parts to be dried;

2) The correction of the value-added tax and the comprehensive income tax by the Defendant against KimO, a lessor, is merely a correction of the revenue amount of under-reported KO and cannot be deemed to have changed the ownership of the revenue amount from the Plaintiff to KimO. ② The circumstances in which the Plaintiff’s global income tax base exceeds the tax base and the tax amount to be reported pursuant to the Plaintiff’s global income tax law due to under-reported the rental fee as necessary expenses fall under the ordinary grounds for correction claim under Article 45-2(1) of the Framework Act on National Taxes, and the period for filing a request for correction is within 90 days after the date when the Plaintiff became aware of the disposition, and within three years after the statutory due date of return expires, and the Defendant’s correction of the value-added tax and the comprehensive income tax by KimO constitutes a ground for filing a subsequent request for correction under Article 45-2(2)2 of the Framework Act on National Taxes. Therefore, the Plaintiff

3. Conclusion

Then, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed due to the lack of reason, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.