Seoul Administrative Court 2009Guhap46498 ( October 20, 2010)

Seocho 209west 2301 ( October 05, 2009)

Value-added tax reduction for general taxi transport business entities;

Since it is confirmed that the amount equivalent to the reduced tax amount has been paid to an employee in addition to the existing wage due to the labor-management agreement, the plaintiff has used the reduced tax amount for improvement of treatment and welfare

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

46 46 46 46 46 46 48

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The Defendant’s imposition of value-added tax of KRW 8,193,630 on May 1, 2009 against the Plaintiff on the second term of 207 and the imposition of KRW 2,622,810 on the first term of 2008 shall be revoked.

3. The total costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant.

The main text is as follows (8,193,680 won and 2,622,840 won and 8,193,630 won and 2,622,810 won and 2,62,810 won, respectively, appears to be written in writing in the written complaint).

쇠鹬 쇠鹬 3000 쇠鹬 3000

1. Details of the disposition;

The court's explanation on this part is the same as the corresponding part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, this part of the judgment is accepted in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The Plaintiff used the reduced tax amount of the instant case to be directly or indirectly included in the basic salary or to improve treatment, etc.

B. Relevant statutes

It is as shown in the attached Form.

(c) Fact of recognition;

(1) Implementation of the VAT reduction and exemption system for general taxi transport business entities

(A) Upon the amendment of the Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption Act by Act No. 4952 on August 4, 1995, with respect to general taxi transport business operators under the former Automobile Transport Business Act (repealed by the Enforcement of the Passenger Transport Business Act), 50/100 of the amount of the value-added tax paid was reduced. At the time, the Minister of Construction and Transportation issued a public notice to instruct the relevant business operators and relevant organizations to provide guidance and supervision to enable them to use the reduced tax amount for improving poor treatment of taxi drivers through the implementation of the reduction and exemption of value-added tax, taking into account that the purpose of the above amendment is to provide support for the reduction of the reduced tax amount due to the reduction and exemption of value-added tax to be used for improving poor treatment of taxi drivers through consultation between labor and management.

(B) Since then, Article 106-4(2) of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act (amended by Act No. 7322 of Dec. 31, 2004, which entered into force on Jan. 1, 2005, provides that "the value-added tax reduction amount shall be used for the improvement of treatment and welfare of general taxi drivers as prescribed by the Minister of Construction and Transportation," the Minister of Construction and Transportation provides that "the Minister of Construction and Transportation shall use the tax reduction amount for the improvement of treatment and welfare of the general taxi drivers", and the taxi transport service provider shall use the total value-added tax reduction amount for the improvement of treatment and welfare of workers, and shall pay the total value-added tax amount to employees in cash under the basic salary, allowances, etc., unless the majority workers request to use it by any other means, and shall prepare a guideline on the methods and timing of cash payment and notify it to local governments, the National Federation of taxi Transport Business Association, etc.

(2) Progress of agreement between the Plaintiff and its trade union

(A) Current status of trade unions

Around the mid-190s when the system to reduce the value-added tax on taxi transport business entities was implemented, a trade union organized by the employees who run a company and a trade union organized by the Korean Federation of taxi trade unions (hereinafter referred to as the "Korean Federation of taxi trade unions") and the Korean Federation of taxi trade unions (hereinafter referred to as the "Local Trade Union"). A regional trade union was divided into the Korean Federation of taxi trade unions (hereinafter referred to as the "Local Trade Union"). As the number of subscription units increases after the increase in the number of subscription units, the former Federation of the Korean National Housing (hereinafter referred to as the "Private University") was affiliated with the regional trade union, but around 1997, the labor union of the Plaintiff was established by private houses and changed its affiliation to private houses.

(B) the Wage Agreement, 1995

1) The former Seoul Special Metropolitan City Branch concluded a wage agreement in 1995, stating that the monthly wage of September 22, 1995 from KRW 630,00 to KRW 697,513 shall be increased from KRW 697,513, but the increased amount includes KRW 34,328 out of value-added tax reduction amount.

2) On December 31, 1995, the Seoul taxi business council and the regional trade union delegated by 16 transportation companies, including the Plaintiff, raised basic pay and allowances in concluding the wage agreement in December 31, 1995, and calculated the direct benefit portion of the value-added tax reduction and exemption (However, the wage agreement did not specify the specific amount reflected in the wage), and the indirect benefit portion specified in the Addenda that the business owner utilizes it to promote the welfare of its members.

3) Meanwhile, the case of applying for arbitration of labor disputes (95-126, 128) commenced since collective bargaining to conclude a wage agreement between five companies and a regional trade union established under a regional trade union was not concluded in 1995, and the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Regional Labor Relations Commission recognized that the amount of value-added tax reduced at KRW 34,328 is included in the amount of value-added tax reduced at KRW 67,513,513 according to the wage agreement of the former Seoul District Office on January 5, 1996.

(C) On November 4, 2006, the Seoul taxi business council and the local trade union delegated by 21 transportation companies including the Plaintiff of the wage agreement in 1996 (including companies that were subject to arbitration award among them) as well as the Seoul taxi business council and the local trade union agreed on November 4, 2006 to enter into the wage agreement in 1996, calculated the direct benefit of value-added tax reduction and exemption as well as the basic wage and allowance as the wage agreement in 1995 (Provided, That the wage agreement did not specify specific amount reflected in the wage), and the indirect benefit portion was stipulated in the Addenda that the business owner uses it to promote the welfare of its members. The transportation companies agreed to deposit the welfare fund of KRW 400,000 each month with the association’s expenses in order to improve the welfare of its members.

(d) any subsequent wage agreement;

As a result of the wage agreement between the Seoul taxi business association and the local trade union every year, the Plaintiff determined whether to reflect the amount of value-added tax reduced or exempted, how to use the amount of value-added tax reduced or exempted, and concluded individual wage agreements with the Plaintiff’

(e) Agreement and implementation between the Plaintiff and its trade union

1) The agreement of November 14, 2006

In around 2006, as a dispute surrounding whether the basic pay includes 34,328 won in accordance with the wage agreement in 1995, the conclusion of the wage agreement was delayed. Upon the conclusion of the agreement, the Plaintiff agreed to consult on November 14, 2006 between the Plaintiff’s trade union and the Plaintiff’s trade union on November 14, 2006, with respect to the amount of value-added tax reduced, the Plaintiff shall pay the amount of value-added tax reduced at KRW 33,00 for each worker temporarily from November 2006 to June 2007, on or before November 2006.

2) The agreement of November 1, 2007

On November 1, 2007 between the Plaintiff’s trade union and the Plaintiff’s trade union, with respect to the amount of value-added tax reduced until December 31, 2008, the Plaintiff agreed to pay 50,000 won per worker per month from November 2007 to March 2009 in addition to the previous wage, and to pay 500,000 won from the amount of value-added tax reduced for the first period from January 207 to March 2009.

3) The Agreement of June 20, 2008

On June 20, 2008, the Plaintiff agreed with the Plaintiff’s trade union in addition to the agreement on November 1, 2007, as follows.

(1) In principle, full cash shall be paid for the amount of value-added tax reduced from January 2, 2007 to December 2008.

② The Plaintiff has been paying the abated value-added tax under the Restriction of Special Taxation Act, but on November 1, 2007, the labor-management council agreed to pay 50,000 won per employee per month during the period from January 2007 to December 2008 in order to meet the payment date of the abated value-added tax that has been paid during the period from January 1, 2007 to December 17, 2008. However, the difference is deemed to have been paid as part of the indirect cost, members’ welfare benefit fund, and wage.

(3) During the agreed period, no civil or criminal liability for the request for the reduction of value-added tax shall be charged, and labor and management shall faithfully implement the agreed matters.

(4) The effects of this Agreement shall be retroactive to November 1, 2007.

4) Implementation of agreements

The Plaintiff paid 50,000 won per person to an individual from November 1, 2007 and June 20, 2008, according to the agreement between November 2007 to March 2009.

[Basis] Facts without dispute, Gap's statements, Gap's 6, 10 through 14, 17 through 21, 23, 28, 29, 30, Eul's evidence 3 (including each number), Gap's evidence 7-1, and the purport of the whole pleadings

D. Determination

In full view of the contents of each agreement between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s trade union on June 2008, the Plaintiff agreed on the use of value-added tax reductions from January 2007 to December 2008, the Plaintiff did not clearly state whether the amount of value-added tax reductions of KRW 34,328 is included in wages. However, the Plaintiff’s disposition was unlawful since the Plaintiff paid the difference between the amount of payment and the amount of value-added tax reductions of KRW 50,000 for each employee from November 207 to March 2009 by adding the amount of value-added tax reductions of KRW 34,328 to the previous amount of wage. Thus, the Plaintiff’s disposition of KRW 50,000 for each employee to the previous amount of wage reduction including the amount of value-added tax reductions of KRW 30,500,000,000 for each employee to 10,0000,000 for each employee to 20,000.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case shall be accepted in its entirety on the grounds of its reasoning, and since the judgment of the court of first instance is unfair on the grounds of its conclusion, it shall be revoked. The defendant's disposition of imposition of value-added tax amounting to 8,193,630 on May 1, 2009 and disposition of imposition of value-added tax amounting to 2,62,810 on May 1, 2009 shall be revoked. It is so decided as per Disposition.