logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2009. 10. 15. 선고 2008누37895 판결
물류유통단지 개발사업권 취득이 토지관련 매입세액에 해당하는지 여부[국패]
Case Number of the immediately preceding lawsuit

Seoul Administrative Court 2008Guhap2477 ( November 20, 2008)

Case Number of the previous trial

National High Court Decision 2007west0854 ( October 22, 2007)

Title

Whether the acquisition of the right to the logistics and distribution complex development project constitutes the land-related input tax amount.

Summary

Since the parties agreed to enter into a sales contract for the land and the relevant administrative agencies have a considerable degree of business such as receiving the promise to support the project of this case, it is reasonable to pay the sufficient price for taking over the business right. Thus, it cannot be deemed that the land-related input tax amount is not the land-related input tax amount.

The decision

The contents of the decision shall be the same as attached.

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. Purport of claim

The Defendant’s imposition of KRW 250,00,000 on February 1, 2007 and the imposition of KRW 24,740,00 on KRW 1,50,00 on the Plaintiff shall be revoked, respectively.

2. Purport of appeal

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked. The plaintiff's request shall be dismissed.

Reasons

The reasoning for the court’s explanation on the instant case is as follows: (a) the first instance court’s determination following the determination that the instant input tax amount does not constitute an input tax amount related to land not deducted from the output tax amount under Article 17(2)4 of the Value-Added Tax Act and Article 60(6) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, even if considering the circumstances alleged by the Defendant and considering the evidentiary materials submitted by the Defendant in the trial, is insufficient, and it is difficult to regard it as an input tax amount for expenditure not directly related to the business. Therefore, this is likewise cited

Therefore, the judgment of the first instance court is legitimate, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow