logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
arrow
(영문) 대전고등법원 2012. 09. 19. 선고 2012누219 판결
다른 법인의 제조시설을 이용하였다는 사정만으로는 당해 법인의 매출이 아니라고 단정할 수 없음[국패]
Case Number of the immediately preceding lawsuit

Cheongju District Court 201Guhap1493, 02.02

Case Number of the previous trial

The early appellate court 201 Jeon 2676

Title

It cannot be readily concluded that the use of manufacturing facilities by another corporation is not the sales of the relevant corporation.

Summary

(1) It is difficult to readily conclude that the legal effect of the supply contract of ready-mixed concluded with the pertinent corporation is immediately reverted to another corporation solely on the ground that the pertinent corporation did not prepare an entrusted production contract, etc. for such production, even though it did not pay a separate fee or user fee for the production of ready-mixed using ready-mixed manufacturing facilities of another corporation.

Related statutes

Article 14 of the Framework Act on National Taxes

Cases

(Cheongju)Revocation of revocation of imposition of value added tax, etc. 2012Nu219

Plaintiff, Appellant

XX One other than a limited partnership company

Defendant, appellant and appellant

Director of the Tax Office

Judgment of the first instance court

Cheongju District Court Decision 201Guhap1493 Decided February 2, 2012

Conclusion of Pleadings

August 22, 2012

Imposition of Judgment

September 19, 2012

Text

1. All appeals by the defendant against the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1. Purport of claim

On June 1, 2010, the imposition of each corporate tax and value-added tax as stated in paragraph (1) among the details of the attached disposition imposed by the Defendant against Plaintiff XX limited partnership company, and the imposition of each value-added tax as stated in paragraph (2) among the details of the attached disposition imposed by the Defendant against Plaintiff O limited partnership company.

2. Purport of appeal

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

Reasons

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasoning for this Court’s explanation concerning this case is as follows. Thus, the reasoning for this Court’s reasoning is the same as that for the judgment of the court of first instance, under Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

O The 15th 1-2th 5th 1-2th 5th 1-2 of the first instance judgment "one hundred to twenty highest prices" shall be read as "ten to twenty highest prices", and the 5th 2th 5th 2 shall be read as "ten highest prices".

O The 13th written judgment of the first instance court shall be in attached Form 2 in attached Form 3.

2. Conclusion

Therefore, all of the plaintiffs' claims are reasonable, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the defendant's appeal against the plaintiffs is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow