logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2013. 12. 13. 선고 2013누16717 판결
쟁점 증측건물에 대한 용역의 공급시기를 사용승인일로 본 처분은 정당함[국승]
Case Number of the immediately preceding lawsuit

Suwon District Court 2012Guhap10216 ( October 16, 2013)

Title

This disposition is justified as of the date of approval for use of services for the increased building at issue;

Summary

(1) The Corporation shall be deemed to have completed the provision of scheduled services around October 28, 2010, where the normal supply price is determined at the completion of the provision of services, and unless special circumstances exist, the Corporation shall be deemed to have completed the construction work in accordance with the design documents and drawings and had the approval for use after completing the construction work in accordance with the terms and conditions of the above contract. Therefore, the determination that the date of approval for the use of the services

Related statutes

Article 9 (2) of the Value-Added Tax Act

Cases

2013Nu16717. Revocation of the imposition of value-added tax

Plaintiff and appellant

IsaA

Defendant, Appellant

Head of Suwon Tax Office

Judgment of the first instance court

Suwon District Court Decision 2012Guhap10216 Decided May 16, 2013

Conclusion of Pleadings

December 3, 2013

Imposition of Judgment

December 13, 2013

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked.

On November 8, 2011, the Defendant revoked the imposition of the value-added tax on the first quarter of 201 against the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasoning for this Court’s explanation concerning this case is as follows: (a) the Do-type 11 of the 5th judgment of the first instance court is the contract price for the Do-type 11 of the 5th judgment; and (b) the 6th judgment of the second instance as of February 28, 2010, with the exception of the Do-type 6th judgment of February 28, 201 as of February 28, 201, it is identical to the entry of the reasons for the first instance judgment; and (c) therefore, it shall be cited in accordance with

2. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim seeking the cancellation of the disposition of this case shall be dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow