logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2016.08.30 2016누36811
부가가치세부과처분취소
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

Reasons

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation of this case is as stated in the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for dismissal or addition of the judgment of the court of first instance as follows. Thus, this is accepted in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

In addition, Article 17-2(3) of the former Value-Added Tax Act provides that the entrepreneur who is supplied with goods or services shall deduct all or part of the bad debt tax amount from the input tax amount in the taxable period to which the date when the bad debt becomes final and conclusive belongs, from the input tax amount in the taxable period to which the bad debt tax amount is not deducted, and the head of the competent tax office having jurisdiction over the supplier, as prescribed by Presidential Decree, if the entrepreneur who has received the supply fails to deduct the bad debt tax amount from the bad debt tax amount, from the input tax amount in the taxable period to which the date when the bad debt becomes final and conclusive, and if the entrepreneur who received the supply fails to deduct the bad debt tax amount, from the bad debt tax amount in the taxable period to which the bad debt becomes final and conclusive.

No. 14 of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as follows. Thus, the head of the competent tax office shall not make a decision or rectification to deduct the bad debt from the input tax amount of the person who is supplied with the case where the bad debt is confirmed, from the input tax amount.

(G) In the first instance court, the first instance court added the “Supreme Court Decision 2002Da20964 Decided March 14, 2003” following the first instance court’s ruling, on the following grounds: (a) the supplier’s bad debt cannot be deemed to have been determined as a bad debt amount even if the bad debt becomes final and conclusive even if the bad debt becomes final and conclusive, and thus, the head of the competent tax office cannot determine or revise the amount determined by the supplier’s input tax amount from the supplier’s input tax amount.”

arrow