Seoul Administrative Court 2008Guhap8321 ( October 01, 2008)

207 Heavy 4535 ( December 20, 2007)

Whether additional tax is exempted for underreporting pursuant to the advice of tax experts;

The report on the amount of gift certificates deducted from the value of gift certificates according to the advice of tax experts as the tax base is due to the lack of tax knowledge, even though there was no intention to evade the tax, it cannot be deemed that there is a justifiable reason that it cannot be caused by the failure to perform the tax due to the lack of tax knowledge. Therefore

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

Article 22 (Additional Tax)

1. The plaintiffs' appeal is dismissed.

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

The judgment of the first instance court shall be revoked. The defendant in the attached imposition list shall revoke the imposition disposition of the value-added tax on the item column and the amount to be imposed in lieu of the plaintiff in the column for entry on the date of the disposition by the defendant in the column for entry.

1.The reasons why this Court shall present in the judgment are the same as the reasons why the judgment of the first instance is followed, so it shall be based on Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act, Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

(a) The list of the attached imposition details in attached Form 4-3 shall be added to the “list of imposition details of this judgment”;

(c).

(b)from 5.10 to 5.10 to 5.10 to 5.10:

(3) If the penalty tax is deemed to be illegal,

(1) The right of goods provided by the plaintiffs to the game users as a substitute goods from the certified tax accountant acting for the declaration of gold, etc., shall not be subject to the value-added tax, and shall hear the words such as the truster.

It is true that the tax office filed and paid the value-added tax by calculating the purchase price of the merchandise coupons provided as the value-added tax base in the way of calculating the input amount as the value-added tax base, 2. The national game business entity also filed and paid the value-added tax by calculating the value-added tax in the same way as the plaintiff, and the tax office did not clearly understand the method of calculating the value-added tax, while the game business entity knew the method of calculating the value-added tax, and it makes it clear that the value of the merchandise coupons provided as the merchandise of the board of directors of the speculative game business is not deducted from the value-added tax base, (3) the plaintiff imposed the value-added tax on the game business entity by calculating the value-added tax in the way of the method such as the return and payment of the value-added tax by calculating the value-added tax in the same way as the plaintiff's opinion, and there is no legitimate reason to reject the return and payment of the value-added tax by calculating the value-added tax in the same way as the plaintiff's opinion.

(c)from 8-3 to 9-1 administration shall be as follows:

(3) If the penalty tax is deemed to have been partially illegal

Under the tax law, in order to be used for the exercise of the taxation right and the realization of the tax claim, if a taxpayer violates various obligations such as a tax return and tax payment, etc., which are stipulated in the law without justifiable reason, the individual tax law is stipulated respectively, and the taxpayer's intention and negligence are not considered, and the taxpayer's intention and negligence are not considered. However, if there is a circumstance that the taxpayer did not know of his obligation or that there is a reason that the taxpayer would not be aware of his obligation, it may not be imposed if there is a justifiable reason that is not attributable to the failure of the taxpayer to neglect the obligation (see Supreme Court Decision 98Du2379 delivered on March 9, 199).

In this case, even if the tax authority did not express any specific opinion as to the notification and payment of value-added tax by calculating the amount after deducting the purchase price of merchandises offered as free gifts from the inputs of the game as the base of value-added tax, such opinion cannot be viewed as an expression of opinion that the tax authority would recognize the amount obtained by deducting the value of merchandises offered as free gifts from the inputs of the game as the base of value-added tax, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge that the opinion of the tax authority was expressed. According to the purport of the entire pleadings, the tax authority stated that the value of merchandises offered as free gifts from the cash inputs by the game users in calculating the value-added tax base of the gambling game room on January 9, 206, and it can be acknowledged that the facts were used as tax guidance materials for the game business operators, and therefore, it cannot be viewed that the Plaintiffs did not have any justifiable reason to impose value-added tax on the Plaintiffs for the return and payment of value-added tax for the first time in 2005 and 196.

2. If so, it is reasonable that the plaintiff's claim should be dismissed as it is without reason. The judgment of the court of first instance is identical to that of the court of first instance, so that the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without reason.