Whether the input tax amount related to capital expenditures on land is deducted from the output tax amount.

If part of the land is donated to the State, etc. free of charge for road use, the value of the land shall be deemed the capital expenditure for the remaining land, and the capital expenditure for the land shall be deemed the deduction from the input tax amount.

Article 60 of the Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act

1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The Defendant’s imposition of KRW 18,396,860 of the imposition of value-added tax for the second period of 2004 and the first period of 2005 against the Plaintiff on May 26, 2005 shall be revoked.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On October 9, 2001, the Plaintiff and the director of the regional tax office of ○○○○-dong and the director of the regional tax office of ○○○○○-dong and planned to own or own the Plaintiff, newly constructed a ○○ Tax Office building on 00 square meters of land 9,917.36 square meters, and entered into an exchange agreement between the Plaintiff and the director of the regional tax office of ○○○-dong and the director of the regional tax office to transfer the ownership of the above land and the office building on 00 square meters of land 10,332.2 square meters of land outside ○○-dong, ○○-dong, ○○○-dong and 1,909.

나. 원고는 ○○세무서 신축을 위해 ○○시청에 건축허가 및 도시계획시설사업의 사업시행자 지정 및 실시계획인가신청을 하였고, ○○시장은 2003. 9. 29. ○○세무서 주변도로 4,014㎡(○○시 ○○동 ○○○-○ 임야 2,681㎡외 5필지, 이하 ‵이 사건 쟁점도로′라고 한다)를 건설하여 기부채납하는 조건으로 위 도시계획시설사업{공공청사(세무서) 및 도시계획도로시설}시행자 지정 및 실시계획인가를 하였다.

다. 원고는 아래 [표 1] 기재와 같이 이 사건 쟁점 도로의 건설을 주식회사 ○○○○○ 등에게 하도급을 주어하였고, 이들로부터 공급가액 116,128,620원의 매입세금계산서(이하 ‵이 사건 쟁점세금계산서′라고 한다)를 교부받아 그 매입세액을 매출세액에서 공제하여 부가가치세를 신고하였다.

[Attachment 1] (Unit: Won)

Classification

Subcontractors

Value of Supply

Amount of tax

Details of the Corporation

204 Second Period

(main) ○○○○○

67,840,000

6,784,000

Civil Works Corporation

1, 2005

(main) ○○○○○

101,760,000

10,176,00

(main) ○○○○

3,750,000

375,000

Legal Afforestation Corporation

○○○○

5,000,000

500,000

○○○○

5,618,620

561,860

Survey

Sub-committees

16,128,620

11,612,860

D. After completion of the ○○ Tax Office building in accordance with the above exchange agreement, on August 31, 2005, the Plaintiff entered into an exchange agreement by evaluating the value of the above State property as KRW 9,956,087,550 (including value-added tax of KRW 536,817,550) and the value of the above State property to be exchanged by the Plaintiff as KRW 10,083,835,840, respectively. The detailed assessment items and the appraised value of the ○○ Tax Office building and its appurtenant land are as listed below.

[Attachment 2] (Unit 2: Size of land, source)

Gu Sector

- Of cotton

L. L. L. H. Amount

○○ Land Annexed to the Office of Tax Affairs

9,917.00

4,051,094,500

○○ Tax Office Building

2,915.56

4,362,480,500

Rotten stations, landscaping works, sewage pipes, etc.

1,036,962,00

Expenses for planting donated pine trees

-31,267,000

Value-added Tax

536,817,550

Consolidateds

9,956,087,550

E. On February 24, 2005, the Plaintiff donated the instant land (property value of KRW 193,532,800) to ○○○○○○-dong, ○○○-dong, ○○-dong, and 11 square meters of forest land among the instant issues, with the consent to gratuitously reverted to ○○○○-○○-○, a 394 square meters of forest land, such as ○○○-dong, ○○-dong, ○○-dong, and 11 square meters, but the registration of ownership transfer was made with the consent to gratuitously reverted to ○○○, but it is deemed to avoid a right to move to the Plaintiff, which

바. 피고는 원고가 임야 등을 매입하여 대지로 형질변경을 한 후 ○○세무서를 신축하는 과정에서 이 사건 쟁점도로를 기부채납하는 조건으로 사업실시계획을 인가받아 이 사건 쟁점도로를 건설한 것이므로 이 사건 쟁점도로 건설관련 매입세액은 토지관련 매입세액에 해당하여 이를 매출세액에서 불공제하는 것으로 보아 2005. 5. 26. 원고에게 2004년 제2기 부가가치세 7,672,020원을 경정고지하고, 2005년 제1기 부가가치세 환급신고액 중 12,733,800원(이건 관련금액은 11,612,860원임)에 대하여 환급거부통지를 하였다(아래에서는 위 경정고지와 환급거부통지 중 이 사건 쟁점도로 매입세액 불공제 관련 부분을 통틀어 ‶이 사건 처분″이라 한다).

G. The plaintiff was dissatisfied with the disposition of this case and filed an appeal on June 20, 2005, but was dismissed on March 6, 2006.

The facts without dispute over the basis of recognition, Gap 1 through 3 evidence, Eul 1 through 3 evidence, the fact inquiry results on the ○○ market by this court, the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

(1) The key tax invoice of this case, which the Plaintiff received from the subcontractor in the instant case related to the construction as the key issue issue, is the purchase tax invoice for the incidental services provided as part of the new construction of the ○○ Tax Office in accordance with the above exchange agreement, and the relevant input tax amount is not the land (the key issue issue issue of this case) and should

(2) According to the established rules of the Value-Added Tax Act (Documents No. 46015-1855), in the event that access roads are opened and packed to the land owned by the State or a local government to the pertinent place of business while establishing a place of business to operate a taxable business of value-added tax, the pertinent input tax amount related to the construction does not constitute an undeductible land input tax amount. As the Plaintiff donated the land to the State by constructing the instant key issues, the input tax amount on the instant tax invoice should

(b) relevant statutes;

Article 17 (Payable Tax Amount)

① 사업자가 납부하여야 할 부가가치세액(이하 ‶납부세액″이라 한다)은 자기가 공급한 재화 또는 용역에 대한 세액(이하 ‶매출세액″이라 한다)에서 다음 각호의 세액(이하 ‶매입세액″이라 한다)을 공제한 금액으로 한다. 다만, 매출세액을 초과하는 매입세액은 환급받을 세액(이하 ‶환급세액″이라 한다)으로 한다.

1. The tax amount for the supply of goods or services used or to be used for his own business;

2. The tax amount for the import of goods used or to be used for his own business; and

(2) The following input taxes shall not be deducted from the output tax amount:

4. The input tax amount related to the business of supplying goods or services exempted from the value-added tax (including the input tax amount related to investments) and the land-related purchase tax amount as prescribed by

Article 12 (Exemption from Taxation)

1. Above 11. omitted

12. Land:

13. Above 17. omitted

18. Goods or services supplied free of charge to the State, local government associations, or public organizations prescribed by Presidential Decree;

Article 60 (Scope of Purchasing Tax Amount)

⑥ 법 제17조 제2항 제4호에서 ‶대통령령이 정하는 토지관련 매입세액″이라 함은 토지의 조성 등을 위한 자본적 지출에 관련된 매입세액으로서 다음 각호의 1에 해당하는 매입세액을 말한다.

1. An input tax amount related to the acquisition and alteration of the form and quality of land, the development of factory sites and housing sites;

2. Where a parcel of land on which a building is located is acquired, and the building is removed and only land is used, the input tax amount on the cost of acquisition and removal of the removed

3. An input tax amount related to the expenses forming the acquisition cost of land by increasing the real value of land.

C. Determination

(1) 부가가치세법 제17조 제1항에서는 공제되는 매입세액으로, ① 자기의 사업을 위하여 사용되었거나 사용될 재화 또는 용역의 공급에 대한 세액과 ② 자기의 사업을 위하여 사용되었거나 사용될 재화의 수입에 대한 세액을 규정하고 있고, 같은 조 제2항에서는 공제하지 아니하는 매입세액을 규정하고 있는데, 매출세액에서 공제부인되는 것으로 열거되어 있는 매입세액 중 하나로 제4호(면세사업에 관련된 매입세액 및 토지 관련매입세액)에서 ‶부가가치세가 면제되는 재화 또는 용역을 공급하는 사업에 관련된 매입세액(투자에 관련된 매입세액을 포함한다)과 대통령령이 정하는 토지관련 매입세액″을 규정하고 있다. 부가가치세법 시행령 제60조 제6항은 불공제하는 매입세액 중 위 ‶대통령령이 정하는 토지관련 매입세액″이라 함은 토지의 조성 등을 위한 자본적지출에 관련된 매입세액으로서 ① 토지의 취득 및 형질변경, 공장부지 및 택지의 조성등에 관련된 매입세액, ② 건축물이 있는 토지를 취득하여 그 건축물을 철거하고 토지만을 사용하는 경우에는 철거한 건축물의 취득 및 철거비용에 관련된 매입세액, ③ 토지의 가치를 현실적으로 증가시켜 토지의 취득원가를 구성하는 비용에 관련된 매입세액을 말한다고 규정하고 있다.

(2) The legislative intent of the instant case, namely, the input tax amount related to the capital expenditure of the land at issue, is to not deduct the input tax amount from the output tax amount. The land is the goods exempt from the value-added tax under Article 12(1)12 of the Value-Added Tax Act, and the capital expenditure for the creation, etc. of the land is to be included in the cost for acquisition of the land at the time of the transfer of the relevant land. As such, the acquisition tax amount related to the capital expenditure for the creation, etc. of the land was included in the acquisition amount in the method of calculating the gains from the transfer of the relevant land. Therefore, in light of the legislative intent as seen above, the provisions on the input tax amount related to the land which is not deducted as the input tax amount apply only to the owner of the relevant land who gains gains from the transfer of the land. Thus, even if the supply of the goods or services used for one’s own business increases the real value of the land owned by another, it shall not be deemed that it constitutes the input tax amount not deducted as the input tax amount. The Plaintiff’s established rules for the Value-Added Tax Act.

(3) Examining the instant case in light of the fact that, even if a business implementation plan was approved on the condition that construction and donation as seen in the instant facts of recognition, the appraised value of the ○○ Tax Office building and its appurtenant land did not include the appraised value as to the construction of the instant issues and the instant site and road construction, the input tax amount on the instant tax invoice shall not be deducted by deeming that the instant issue constitutes an incidental service to the construction of the ○○ Tax Office building construction as the instant issue.

In addition, as seen in the above facts, the owner of the site at issue of this case was the plaintiff at the time when the plaintiff disbursed capital for the construction of the road on the site of this case as the main issue of this case. However, on February 24, 2005, after the capital expenditure for the construction of the road was made, the ownership of the site at issue of this case was transferred in the form of donation at ○○○○. Thus, inasmuch as the real estate sales businessman transferred part of the land to the State, etc. free of charge in relation to the execution of the relevant project such as land development or new construction of a building, the value of the land shall be deemed the capital expenditure for the remaining land and the capital expenditure for the land shall be deemed as the capital expenditure for the remaining land, and the input tax amount on the issue tax invoice of this case shall be deducted from the

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the defendant's disposition of this case is legitimate, and the plaintiff's claim seeking its revocation is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.