Seoul High Court 2012Nu21644 (Seoul High Court 2013.021)

Seocho 2010west 1389 (201.05.09)

The exclusion period of imposition for ten years shall not be applied since the act of refunding the value-added tax of gold bullion exporters cannot be viewed as fraudulent or other unlawful act.

Since the gold bullion of this case has been exported before the transfer and has been properly issued for each transaction phase, the Plaintiff’s act of receiving a refund or deduction of value-added tax under the tax invoice of this case does not constitute a case where national tax is deducted or refunded due to fraudulent or other unlawful act.

Article 26-2 of the National Tax Basic Act

2013du6817 Disposition to revoke the imposition of value-added tax.

Hyundai AA Commercial Corporation

Head of the tax office;

Seoul High Court Decision 2012Nu21644 Decided 21, 2013

August 22, 2013

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

Article 26-2 (1) of the former Framework Act on National Taxes (amended by Act No. 10405, Dec. 27, 2010; hereinafter the same) provides that "ten years from the date on which a national tax may be imposed, where a taxpayer evades a national tax, obtains a refund or deduction by fraud or other unlawful means," subparagraph 1 provides that "if a taxpayer fails to file a tax base return by the statutory due date of return, for seven years from the date on which a national tax may be imposed," and subparagraph 2 of Article 26-2 (1) provides that "if a taxpayer does not fall under subparagraphs 1 and 2, for five years from the date on which a national tax may be imposed."

The court below rejected the defendant's assertion that since the disposition of this case was unlawful since the imposition of value-added tax and corporate tax for the business year 2003 was imposed five years after the lapse of the exclusion period for the imposition of national taxes under Article 26-2 (1) 3 of the former Framework Act on National Taxes, since the importer of the gold bullion of this case distributed and exported gold bullion to the plaintiff who is the exporter, and the plaintiff was issued properly at each transaction stage, and since the plaintiff's act of receiving the refund or deduction of value-added tax under the tax invoice of this case does not constitute a case of receiving the refund or deduction of national taxes through fraud or other unlawful act, Article 26-2 (1) 1 of the former Framework Act on National Taxes cannot be applied. Since the plaintiff filed a tax base return with the contents of receiving the refund or deduction of value-added tax within the return period of tax base under the Value-Added Tax Act, the application of subparagraph 3 of the same paragraph cannot be deemed to violate the good faith principle, and the starting date of exclusion period for imposition cannot be seen as 1347 days.

In light of relevant regulations, legal principles, and records, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is no violation of law such as misapprehension of legal principles as to the exclusion period of the imposition of national taxes, as alleged in the

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.