logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2018. 06. 15. 선고 2017누82392 판결
이 사건 양도는 사업의 동일성을 유지하면서 경영주체만을 교체한 것으로서 사업의 양도에 해당함[국승]
Case Number of the immediately preceding lawsuit

District Court-2016-Gu Partnership-792 ( October 24, 2017)

Title

The transfer of this case is the transfer of the business, which only replaces the management entity while maintaining the identity of the business.

Summary

The term "transfer of business" means the transfer of physical and human facilities, rights, and duties, etc. including business property for each place of business to maintain the identity of the business and the replacement of only the business owner while maintaining the identity of the business.

Related statutes

Article 10 (Special Cases of Supply of Goods)

Cases

2017Nu82392 Revocation of Disposition of Imposition of Value-Added Tax

Plaintiff and appellant

O Food Co., Ltd.

Defendant, Appellant

O Head of tax office

Judgment of the first instance court

Suwon District Court Decision 2016Guhap792 Decided October 24, 2017

Conclusion of Pleadings

May 11, 2018

Imposition of Judgment

June 15, 2018

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. The disposition of imposition of value-added tax of KRW 148,790,190 against the Plaintiff on May 11, 2015 by the Defendant shall be revoked.

Reasons

1. Quotation of the reasons for the judgment of the first instance;

This decision is based on Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, since the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance except for the dismissal of the following contents:

○ 2 pages 15 of the Value-Added Tax Act is the former Value-Added Tax Act (amended by Act No. 15223, Dec. 19, 2017; hereinafter the former Value-Added Tax Act).

The "Value-Added Tax Act" of 4, 16, 17 and 7 pages are added to the "former Value-Added Tax Act".

○ 7 pages 8, the Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 28641, Feb. 13, 2018) is amended by the former Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act.

2. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is 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 without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow