logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2017. 08. 24. 선고 2017두44121 판결
(심리불속행) 토지관련 매입세액 여부는 사업의 내용, 지출목적, 경위에 비춰 비용마다 개별적으로 판단해야 함[국승]
Case Number of the immediately preceding lawsuit

Seoul High Court (Chuncheon)-2015-Nu1057 (Law No. 17, 2017)

Case Number of the previous trial

early 2014 Middle 4282 (2015.02)

Title

(C) Whether the input tax amount related to the land should be determined individually on each cost, depending on the content, purpose, and circumstances of the project.

Summary

(Main) In the event that a taxpayer mixed a land-related input tax amount and a non-related input tax amount, whether a certain cost constitutes a land-related input tax amount should be determined individually for each cost in light of the content of the business, the purpose and circumstances of the expenditure, etc.

Related statutes

Article 39 of the Value-Added Tax Act

Article 80 of the Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act

Cases

2017Du44121 Disposition to revoke the imposition of value-added tax.

Plaintiff-Appellant

AAAAA Corporation

Defendant-Appellee

BB Director of the Tax Office

Judgment of the lower court

Seoul High Court (Chuncheon) Decision 2015Nu1057 Decided April 17, 2017

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

In the order of the lower judgment, the phrase “value-added tax and additional tax 29,372,580 won for the second term portion of 2012” in Article 1(a) of the order of the lower judgment shall be deemed to read “value-added tax and additional tax 16,00,910 won for the second term portion of 2012”, and the phrase “value-added tax and additional tax 8,98,860 won for the second term portion of 2013” shall be deemed to read “value-added tax and additional tax 4,902,190 won for the second term portion

Reasons

Although the lower judgment was examined in light of the records of this case, it is recognized that the assertion on the grounds of appeal falls under Article 4 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Procedure

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed pursuant to Article 5 of the above Act. Since it is clear that there is a error in the judgment of the court below, it is corrected. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

arrow