Cancellation of rejection of national tax refund

The provisions of the Framework Act on National Taxes stipulate that the amount of tax refund arising from the cancellation of the determination of the amount of income of the nominal owner originally reported shall be refunded to the actual income earner in cases where the amount of tax refund remains after deducting the amount of tax paid by the actual income earner. However, the basic provisions of the Framework Act on National Taxes apply to cases where the actual income earner paid a national tax

Article 51 (Appropriation and Refund of National Tax Refund)

2014Guhap68218 Demanding revocation of a disposition rejecting national tax refund

2. On January 13, 2007, the Plaintiff’s attachment No. 201

BB sold, and on March 30, 2007, directly unpaid value in lieu of partial payment of the balance.

The fact that he paid 53,255,130 won, including dental services (the seizure of the defendant Republic of Korea was released on the same day);

③ Defendant Republic of Korea: (a) on October 19, 2007, on the ground of the unpaid value-added tax on the instant business; (b)

Go-owned*****Gu**9-2 * Lease* Lease No. 401(hereinafter referred to as "the case") of the fourth floor of the lease 401(hereinafter referred to as "the case

(4) On March 10, 2008, the plaintiff seized No. 401 (hereinafter referred to as "No. 401")

The key net value-added tax was directly unpaid in lieu of partial payment of intermediate payment on April 1, 2008.

33,667,580 won was paid (the attachment of the defendant Republic of Korea was removed on the same day)

may be determined.

According to the above facts of recognition, the plaintiff sold the apartment owned by the plaintiff and so decided.

in order to release the seizure of Korea, value-added tax, etc. on the Project of this case

86,922,710 won (=53,255,130 won + 33,67,580 won) was paid.

그런데 피고 @@세무서장이 2013. 4. 22경 이 사건 사업의 사업자가 원고가 아니라

AA and settlement with the effect that the value-added tax imposed is revoked

As seen earlier, the decision of acceptance was made and the name of the business operator was changed to AA.

Therefore, Defendant Republic of Korea is the Plaintiff, and the value-added tax paid by the Plaintiff not the Plaintiff.

From October 1, 2014, which is the day following the service of a copy of the complaint in this case, 86,922,710 won, and the service of a copy of the complaint in this case.

Until June 19, 2015, June 19, 2015, the date of the instant judgment, 5% per annum prescribed by the Civil Act, and Da from the following day

The delayed damage by the rate of 20% per annum under the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings until the date of full payment.

shall be liable to pay the money.

4. Conclusion

그렇다면 원고의 피고 @@세무서장에 대한 소는 부적법하여 각하하고, 원고의 피고

All claims against the Republic of Korea shall be quoted on the grounds of the ruling as per Disposition.

Park AA

@@세무서장, 대한민국

1. 원고의 피고 @@세무서장에 대한 소를 모두 각하한다.

2. Defendant Republic of Korea shall pay to the Plaintiff 86,922,710 won with 5% interest per annum from October 1, 2014 to June 19, 2015, and 20% interest per annum from the next day to the day of full payment.

3. 소송비용 중 원고와 피고 @@세무서장 사이에 생긴 부분은 원고가, 원고와 피고 대한민국 사이에 생긴 부분은 피고 대한민국이 각 부담한다.

4. Paragraph 2 can be provisionally executed.

청 구 취 지주위적 청구취지 : 피고 @@세무서장은 원고에게 한 국세환급 거부처분을 취소한다. 제1 예비적 청구취지 : 피고 @@세무서장이 원고의 2013. 10. 18.자 국세환급신청에 대하여 처분을 하지 않은 부작위가 위법임을 확인한다.

Article 2 Preliminary Claim: Section 2 of this Decree.

1. Details of the instant case

가. 원고는 2013. 4. 10.경 2004. 8. 1.부터 원고 명의로 운영되어 온 @@시 @@구 구미동 159 월드쇼핑 C동 403호에 대한 임대사업(이하 '이 사건 사업'이라 한다)의 실사업자가 아니므로 원고에게 부과된 부가가치세를 취소해달라는 취지의 고충신청을 하였다.

나. 피고 @@세무서장은 2013. 4. 22.경 원고의 고충 내용이 타당하다고 인정하여 원고에게 부과된 부가가치세를 취소하는 것으로 인용결정을 한 후 이를 원고에게 통지하고, 2013. 5. 10. 이 사건 사업의 실사업자 명의를 원고에서 AAA로 변경하였다.다. 원고는 2013. 10. 18. 피고 @@세무서장에게 이 사건 사업과 관련된 부가가치세 등 86,922,710원의 환급을 신청했으나 피고 @@세무서장이 응하지 않자, 2014. 1. 17. 중부지방국세청에 이의신청을 하고, 2014. 2. 10. 국세심판원에 심판청구를 하였으나 모두 각하되었다.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, 9, 10 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply)

2. 피고 @@세무서장에 대한 소에 관한 판단

국세환급금 결정에 관한 규정은 이미 납세의무자의 환급청구권이 확정된 국세환급금에 대하여 내부적 사무처리절차로서 과세관청의 환급절차를 규정한 것에 지나지 않고 위 규정에 의한 국세환급금결정에 의하여 비로소 환급청구권이 확정되는 것은 아니므로, 위 국세환급금결정이나 이 결정을 구하는 신청에 대한 환급거부결정은 납세의무자가 갖는 환급청구권의 존부나 범위에 구체적이고 직접적인 영향을 미치는 처분이 아니어서 항고소송의 대상이 되는 처분이라고 볼 수 없다(대법원 1989. 6. 15. 선고 88누6436 전원합의체 판결, 대법원 2009.11.26. 선고 2007두4018 판결 등 참조). 따라서 이를 전제로 한 피고 @@세무서장에 대한 소는 모두 부적법하다.

3. Determination on the claim against Defendant Republic of Korea

A. As to Defendant Republic of Korea’s defense prior to the merits

The Republic of Korea requires that the consolidation of related civil cases shall be lawful by an original appeal litigation.

As such, if the original appeal is unlawful, the combined civil lawsuit is also unlawful.

The argument that such rejection must be dismissed.

However, the State's duty to pay the refund of value-added tax to the taxpayer is the public law duty.

Since the taxpayer's claim for refund of value-added tax against the country is the Administrative Litigation Act.

Article 3(2) of the Act shall apply to the procedures for a party suit as provided in subparagraph 2 of Article 3 (Supreme Court Decision 2011 Decided March 21, 2013)

C.5564 see Supreme Court en banc Decision)

Therefore, Defendant Republic of Korea cannot accept the aforementioned defenses prior to the merits.

B. Relevant statutes

It is as shown in the attached Form.

C. Determination

The head of a tax office shall, where a taxpayer has paid national taxes by mistake.

immediately determine the amount of the erroneous payment as the national tax refund, and within 30 days after the determination;

Payment shall be made to the taxpayer (Article 51(1) and (6) of the Framework Act on National Taxes).

The rule is confirmed to be a nominal master and imposes tax on the actual income earner pursuant to Article 14 of the Framework Act on National Taxes.

The amount of tax refunded in accordance with the cancellation of the determination of the income of the original nominal owner shall be actual income.

If any remaining amount is deducted as tax payable by such person, the refund shall be made to the actual income earner.

Although the basic rules of the Framework Act on National Taxes (Common Rules 51-0.1), the basic rules of the Framework Act on National Taxes stipulate a real income earner.

applicable to the tax payment, and the nominal owner who is not the actual income earner shall pay a national tax.

(2) the Corporation shall not apply in any case.

Gap's statement of evidence Nos. 5, 7, 11, 12, and 14, and the purpose of the whole pleading is added to the witness's statement of Clerks

(1) On January 23, 2006, Defendant Republic of Korea did not pay value-added tax on the instant business.

로 원고 소유의 @@ @@구 @@동 9-2 GG펠리스 제가동 제2층 제201호(이하 '이