logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2013. 11. 29. 선고 2013누6789 판결
바이어쿠폰은 과세표준에 포함되지 않는 매출 에누리에 해당됨[국패]
Case Number of the immediately preceding lawsuit

Seoul Administrative Court 201Guhap20390 ( October 25, 2013)

Case Number of the previous trial

Cho High Court Decision 2010Du3644 ( December 30, 2011)

Title

Baphones constitute sales discount not included in the tax base.

Summary

The deductible amount of this case is the amount that is directly deducted from the service fee, which is the price for the provision of the plaintiff's service, as the price for the provision of the service, in accordance with the fulfillment of the condition of the provision of service, and that is not included in the tax base, the sales member agrees to the display of the item discount or boophone, etc. by the plaintiff and reduces the sales price as at the time of the transaction with the purchasing member to whom the item discount or boophone applies.

Cases

2013Nu6581 Revocation of the imposition of value-added tax

2013Nu6772 (Consolidated) Revocation of the imposition of value-added tax

2013Nu6789 (Consolidated) Revocation of the imposition of value-added tax

Plaintiff, Appellant

AAA Korea Co., Ltd.

Defendant, appellant and appellant

Head of the District Tax Office

Judgment of the first instance court

Seoul Administrative Court Decision 201Guhap20390, 2012Guhap10819 (Joint), 2012Guhap31229 (Joint) Decided January 25, 2013

Conclusion of Pleadings

November 5, 2013

Imposition of Judgment

November 29, 2013

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 cancellation tax amount in each disposition in which the defendant stated the imposition of value-added tax (attached Form) against the plaintiff shall be revoked in excess of the stated amount", and the purport of appeal 2.

The judgment of the first instance is revoked. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The court's reasoning concerning this case is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the dismissal or addition as stated in paragraph (2) below. Thus, this court's reasoning is cited as it is in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Parts to be removed or added;

In the first instance court's 5th trial decision, the 9th trial room was held, the 9th trial room was held, and the 10th (sales activities of the selling members) of the 27th (sales activities of the selling members) of the 10th trial.

In the 11th judgment of the first instance court, following the sales activities in the 14th sentence, and following the 5th taxable period in the 17th sentence.

In addition, the entry of the first instance court's 19th trial's 3th to 7th trial's decision is as follows.

② Bounty is money and other valuables paid to the other party to a transaction for business promotion without connection with individual transactions or the price thereof. However, the amount of deduction in the instant case is directly deducted from the service fee for service transactions made between the Plaintiff and the sales member as the amount discounted from the transaction of goods conducted by the Plaintiff with the consent of the sales member, according to the formula executed by the Plaintiff under the consent of the sales member.

In addition, the description of the first instance court's 20th to 5th court's 20th court decision is as follows.

(2) In the case of an item discount or coophones, all of which are the same as the process and effect of the discount of items and the coophones on the discount of sales proceeds and service charges, such as the discount of sales proceeds of the goods as a result of the discount of sales proceeds of the goods, and the discount of service charges as the equivalent amount;

3. Conclusion

If so, the plaintiff's claim is reasonable, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow