logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2016. 12. 15. 선고 2016두49242 판결
(심리불속행) 비정기 조사대상자 선정, 세무조사 사전통지 생략, 영세율, 임시투자세액공제 부인 등에 위법이 없음[국승]
Case Number of the immediately preceding lawsuit

Daejeon High Court 2015Nu13909 ( August 11, 2016)

Title

(Trial Disorder) No violation exists such as selection of persons subject to non-regular investigation, omission of prior notice of tax investigation, zero tax rate, denial of temporary tax credit, etc.

Summary

(In the first instance, the denial of temporary tax credit for the investment-invested portion is legitimate, and the supply of the instant service does not fall under the zero-rate tax rate.

Related statutes

Article 81-6 of the Framework Act on National Taxes, Article 11 of the Value-Added Tax Act, and Article 26 of the Restriction of

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

Reasons

All of the records of this case and the judgment of the court below and the grounds of appeal were examined, but it is clear that the assertion on the grounds of appeal by the appellant constitutes Article 4 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure for Appeal and therefore, the appeal is dismissed under Article 5 of the above Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by

arrow