[1] The legislative purpose of Article 6 (1) of the Certified Tax Accountant Act, which revised the subject to registration in the Certified Tax Accountant Register to "a person who passed the Certified Tax Accountants Qualification Examination"

[2] Whether an attorney-at-law who failed to pass a certified tax accountant qualification examination can register as a certified tax accountant in the certified tax accountant register (negative in principle)

[1] The purpose of Article 6(1) of the Certified Tax Accountant Act is to enhance the role of a certified tax accountant as a specialized tax agent agent in the change of tax payment environment, such as expansion of electronic tax system, and to prevent improper tax agent services caused by mass emissions by certified tax accountants, attorneys-at-law, and certified public accountants, and to allow consumers to use only the qualification examination for certified tax accountants, thereby enhancing public confidence in the name of qualification as certified tax accountant, enabling consumers to choose a reasonable tax service by distinguishing those who have passed the qualification examination for certified tax accountants from those who have passed the qualification examination for certified tax accountants, and to clarify liability for each certified tax accountant by having certified tax accountants and attorneys, etc. conduct tax agent services in their own name.

[2] In full view of the contents, amendment process, legislative purpose, etc. of relevant provisions under Articles 3, 6, and 20 of the Certified Tax Accountant Act, an attorney-at-law who failed to pass the certified tax accountant qualification examination shall be deemed unable to register as a certified tax accountant in the Certified Tax Accountant Register unless he/she is subject to Article 2(1) of the Addenda to the Certified Tax Accountant Act (amended by December 31, 2003)

[1] Article 6 (1) of the Certified Tax Accountant Act / [2] Article 3 subparagraph 4 of the former Certified Tax Accountant Act (Amended by Act No. 7032, Dec. 31, 2003); Articles 3, 6 (1), and 20 of the Certified Tax Accountant Act; Articles 3, 6 (1), and 20 of the Certified Tax Accountant Act; Article 2 (1) of the Addenda (Amended by Act No. 7032, Dec. 31, 2003)

Plaintiff (Law Firm Sejong et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Seoul Regional Tax Office

Seoul High Court Decision 2011Nu15673 decided December 14, 2011

The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

Article 3 subparag. 4 of the former Certified Tax Accountant Act (amended by Act No. 7032 of Dec. 31, 2003; hereinafter “former Certified Tax Accountant Act”) provides that a person qualified as a certified tax accountant shall be qualified. Article 6(1) of the former Certified Tax Accountant Act provides that a person qualified as a certified tax accountant shall be registered in the Certified Tax Accountant Register when he/she intends to commence tax agent business. Meanwhile, Article 20 of the former Certified Tax Accountant Act provides that a person who is not a certified tax accountant registered pursuant to Article 6 of the former Certified Tax Accountant Act shall be prohibited from providing tax agent services unless he/she has registered as a certified tax accountant (paragraph (1)), and Article 6 of the former Certified Tax Accountant Act provides that a person qualified as a certified tax accountant may not be permitted to provide tax agent services unless he/she passes the Certified Tax Accountant Act’s amended Certified Tax Accountant Act (hereinafter “Amended by Act No. 7032 of Dec. 31, 2003”).

The above amendment aims to enhance the role of tax accountants as a specialized tax agent in the changing tax payment environment, such as the expansion of electronic tax administration, while preventing defective tax agents due to mass emissions by certified tax accountants, attorneys-at-law, and certified public accountants, and allowing only those who passed a qualifying examination for certified tax accountants to use the name of certified tax accountants, thereby enhancing public confidence in the name of certified tax accountants, enabling consumers to choose a reasonable tax service by classifying those who passed the qualification examination for certified tax accountants and other qualified taxpayers, and clarifying liability for each certified tax accountant by having certified tax accountants, attorneys-at-law, etc. conduct tax agent services in their own name.

In full view of the contents, amendment process, legislative purpose, etc. of relevant provisions, including Articles 3, 6, and 20 of the Certified Tax Accountant Act, it is reasonable to deem that an attorney-at-law who failed to pass the certified tax accountant examination cannot register as a certified tax accountant in the Certified Tax Accountant Register unless he/she is subject to the provisions of the Addenda

In the same purport, the judgment of the court below that the disposition of this case, which rejected the plaintiff's application for registration of tax accountant, is legitimate, is just, unless the plaintiff is an attorney qualified as a certified tax accountant, but does not fall under an attorney-at-law or judicial trainee as stipulated in the supplementary provisions of this case. In so doing, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the court below did not err by misapprehending

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Park Poe-young (Presiding Justice)