Seoul High Court 2004Nu5586 (No. 27, 2005)

A person liable to pay value-added tax in a trust with other profits

In the case of other profit trust, the profits and expenses incurred by the management, disposal, etc. of trust property shall be ultimately vested in the beneficiary within the scope of the right to benefit.

The contents of the decision shall be the same as attached.

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

Generally, value-added tax is imposed on a person who supplies goods or services independently in business, i.e., a truster, transfers or disposes of a specific property right to a trustee, and requires the trustee to manage and dispose of the property right for the purpose of trust. In managing and disposing of trust property, if the trustee supplies or becomes supplied with the goods or services, the trustee himself/herself becomes a contracting party and the trustee performs the trust business. However, the profits and expenses incurred from the management and disposal of the trust property finally accrue to the truster and the truster actually returns to the truster's account. Thus, the trust under the Trust Act is also imposed on the truster's account. Thus, the trust under the Trust Act is also imposed on the truster's own account as defined in Article 6 (5) of the Value-Added Tax Act, and the truster and the person liable to pay value-added tax should, in principle, be deemed to be the truster in performing the trust business such as the management and disposal of the trust property. However, if the beneficiary is designated under the trust contract, other than the truster and the beneficiary actually reverts the trust property to the beneficiary within 90.

The court below is just in holding that the taxpayer of the value-added tax (sales tax) due to the transfer of the building among the real estate of this case is not the truster of the trust contract of this case, but the beneficiary, and thus the disposition of the value-added tax of this case is lawful. Contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, the court below did not err in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the taxpayer of value-added tax, the deduction of input tax under the Value-Added Tax Act, or

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