There are reasonable grounds for determining the initial date of the refund and additional charges as the date of filing a request for correction.

It is reasonable to set the initial date of adding additional refund amount as "the date of filing a request for correction", and as long as the amount of refund amount according to a request for correction is appropriated for the plaintiff's delinquent tax retroactively to the date of filing a request for correction, no additional refund refund refund amount which

Contents are the same as attachment.

Article 43-3 of the Enforcement Decree of Framework Act on National Taxes

Seoul Central District Court 2018Gahap5276

○ ○

Korea

December 20, 2018

January 31, 2019

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Cheong-gu Office

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 00,000,000 won with 15% interest per annum from the day after the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case to the day of complete payment.

1. Basic facts

The following facts may be acknowledged by integrating the purpose of the entire pleadings in each entry in Gap evidence 1 through 12, Eul evidence 1 through 5 (including each number):

A. As the wife of AA, who died on March 23, 2015, the Plaintiff jointly succeeded to the property with BB, CCC, DD, EE, FF, and GG.

B. On November 22, 2017, HHdo Office of Education (competent HHdo Office of Education) rendered a final and conclusive judgment that “the Plaintiff shall pay to HHdo 10,832,013,816 won per annum from September 15, 2015 to November 22, 2017, and 20% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment” (the Plaintiff shall pay to the Plaintiff 10,832,013,816 won, and the amount calculated at the rate of 10% per annum from September 15, 2015 to November 22, 2017).

C. As such, a judgment becomes final and conclusive that the Plaintiff, who succeeded to AA, should return part of the above purchase price to HHdo, the Plaintiff submitted to the chief of the competent district tax office a written claim for correction for the amount of KRW 989,951,567 as global income tax for 2009 and global income tax for 2,753,335,902 as global income tax for 2010 and global income tax for 2,753,335,902 as global income tax for 209, global income tax for 2009, global income tax for 715,567,83 won for 209, global income tax for 2010, global income tax for 270,400,4079 for 209 and global income tax for 2,70,4079 for 20,0079.

D. On February 24, 2018, the J chief of the J Tax Office accepted the Plaintiff’s request for correction, and appropriated the amount of refundable tax to the Plaintiff’s delinquent amount of inheritance tax as of December 6, 2017, as KRW 3,292,157,270 (= KRW 704,084,030 (per 2009 + KRW 2,588,073,230 (per 2010)).

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. Article 43-3 of the Enforcement Decree of the Framework Act on National Taxes (Amended by Presidential Decree No. 26066, Feb. 3, 2015)

Paragraph (1) 5 of this Article, Article 5 of the Addenda to the same Enforcement Decree shall be unconstitutional.

1) The initial date of the national tax refund and additional dues shall be determined by Presidential Decree (Article 52 of the Framework Act on National Taxes);

Article 43-3 (1) 1 of the Enforcement Decree of the Framework Act on National Taxes (amended by Presidential Decree No. 26066, Feb. 3, 2015) does not distinguish cases of national tax refund due to erroneous payment, double payment, or cancellation or correction of a return or imposition that forms the basis of the relevant payment, but on the day immediately following the national tax payment date.

2) However, Article 43 of the Enforcement Decree of the Framework Act on National Taxes (amended by Presidential Decree No. 26066, Feb. 3, 2015)

Article 45-2 of the Framework Act on National Taxes provides that "Where a refund is made due to correction of the amount of tax paid or refunded upon request for correction under Article 45-2 of the Framework Act on National Taxes, the initial date of commencing the national tax refund additional dues shall be the day following the date of request for correction", and Article 5 of the Addenda of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act provides that "Article 43-3 (1) shall apply to the amended provisions of Article 43-3 (

3) The National Tax Service’s correction from “the initial date of national tax refund and additional charges” under the relevant laws and regulations as above.

In the case of changing to the old day, it is necessary to set a proper transitional provision so that the property rights of taxpayers who make a request for correction after a considerable period of time after the payment of national taxes, such as the Plaintiff, should not be excessively restricted without reasonable grounds, thereby minimizing infringement of fundamental rights. However, Article 5 of the Addenda of the Enforcement Decree of the above Act, without exception, Article 10 (Right of Happing) and Articles 11 (Right of Equality), 37 (2) (all freedom and rights of citizens may be restricted by law only when it is necessary for national security, maintenance of order or public welfare, and even in the case of restriction, the essential contents of freedom and rights shall not be infringed) of the Constitution.

4) Accordingly, the Defendant sought payment of the additional refund on the refund of national taxes of KRW 739,021,660 (additional refund on the refund of national taxes of KRW 3,292,157,270, which occurred from June 1, 2010 to December 5, 2017, as sought by the Plaintiff, after the date of payment.

B. Additional charges for national tax refund accrued during the period from the filing date of claim to the refund determination

Even in accordance with Article 43-3(1)5 of the Enforcement Decree of the Framework Act on National Taxes (amended by Presidential Decree No. 26066, Feb. 3, 2015), additional charges for national tax refund accrued to the defendant during the period from the date of filing the Plaintiff’s request for correction (amended by Presidential Decree No. 26066, Dec. 6, 2017) to the date of determining refund (see Supreme Court Decision 201

3. Determination

First, Article 43-3 (1) 5 of the Enforcement Decree of the Framework Act on National Taxes (amended by Presidential Decree No. 2606, Feb. 3, 2015) and Article 5 of the Addenda of the same Enforcement Decree provide that no effect exists because they violate the Constitution; ① The amendment of the above Act provides that "the initial date of calculating additional dues applicable to refund upon request for correction (Article 43-3 (1)): Where a taxpayer files an excessive return of tax amount or under-reports the amount of tax to be refunded, and thereby a taxpayer claims correction, the initial date of calculating additional dues of national tax refund in the nature of interest on the national tax refund shall be 30 days after the date of filing the return, or 30 days after the date of filing the return, regardless of the contents of the claim; ② the refund of national tax refund constitutes an interest on the national tax refund as unjust enrichment; ② the amendment of Article 43-1 of the Enforcement Decree of the Framework Act on National Taxes (amended by Presidential Decree No. 2606, Feb. 36, 2019). 206).1).

Next, Article 51 (1) of the Framework Act on National Taxes provides that when the head of a tax office appropriates or pays a national tax refund under Article 51, the amount calculated according to the interest rate prescribed by Presidential Decree shall be added to the national tax refund in consideration of the period from the initial date of calculating the additional refund of national taxes prescribed by Presidential Decree until the date when the refund is determined, the period from the initial date of calculating the additional refund of national taxes prescribed by Presidential Decree to the date when the refund is determined, and the deposit interest rate of financial companies, etc." In Article 51 (3) of the same Act provides that "if a refund is appropriated under paragraph (2) 2, the delinquent national tax, additional dues or disposition fee for arrears shall be deemed to have been extinguished retroactively to the date when the national tax refund occurs, whichever comes later, among the statutory due date of payment of national tax in arrears and the date when the national tax refund prescribed by Presidential Decree occurs." As seen above, as long as the defendant appropriated a refund amount of 3,292,157,270 won retroactively from the filing date of a request for correction.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.