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

A person who supplies goods or services independently from the business who is liable to pay the value-added tax under Article 2 (1) of the Value-Added Tax Act refers to an entrepreneur who supplies goods or services in the form of business to the extent that the value-added may be created and continuously and repeatedly.

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

[Plaintiff-Appellant] Plaintiff 1 and 1 other (Law Firm Domin, Attorneys Park Jae-soo and 1 other, Counsel for plaintiff-appellant-appellant-appellant-appellant-appellant-appellant-Appellee)

Plaintiff 1 and 3 others, Counsel for the defendant-appellant-appellee

Head of Dong Tax Office

Seoul High Court Decision 91Gu27299 delivered on December 10, 1992

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

A person who supplies goods or services independently from a person liable to pay the value-added tax under Article 2 (1) of the Value-Added Tax Act refers to a person who supplies goods or services in the form of business to an extent that it can create a value-added and continuous and repeated intent (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 86Nu489, Mar. 24, 1987; Supreme Court Decision 86Nu876, May 26, 198; Supreme Court Decision 89Nu2646, May 28, 1991).

Therefore, as determined by the court below, if the plaintiff purchased the building site and its ground building of this case, and removed the building site of this case and newly constructed one unit of living facilities and one unit of housing of the first floor and the fourth floor above the ground, and transferred it with the building site of this case only for one month, after which the plaintiff acquired it on seven occasions during about six years from 1982, and then purchased the building site and its ground building on seven occasions during six years from 1982, and then newly constructed the building site and its new building and then transferred the building site and its new building. If the plaintiff traded a similar transaction after this case, the plaintiff transferred the building site and its new building site of this case as part of the real estate sale business under the Value-Added Tax Act, the judgment of the court below to the same purport is just and there is no error of law by misapprehending legal principles as

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 Kim Yong-sung (Presiding Justice)