본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
청구법인이 쟁점기계장치를 고가에 매입한 것으로 보아 부당행위계산 부인규정을 적용하여 근로소득세(원천분)를 과세한 처분의 당부

【Request Number】

Appellate Court 2018J 3376 ( October 04, 2019)

[세 목]

Global Income

[Types of Decision]

Dismissal

[Summary of Decision]

The key issue is that the acquisition value is calculated by applying a voluntary ratio to the price of a quotation, etc. received from a related company, etc., and it is difficult to accept the claim claim in light of the fact that it is generally evaluated by objective or reasonable means formed in a normal transaction, and that it is difficult

[Related Acts]

Article 52 of the Corporate Tax Act

[주 문]

The appeal is dismissed.

[이 유]

1. Summary of disposition;

A. On July 1, 2014, a claimant corporation purchased detailed devices (including detailed devices 2-1-1 of the specifications table, hereinafter referred to as “markets acquisition value”), such as the physical path of the OO (hereinafter referred to as “OO”) operated by the representative of the claimant corporation, as a corporate entity that is specialized in the elevator (hereinafter referred to as “OO”) that produces and supplies Aluminium, while operating Aluminium and non-ferrous metal heat treatment business, etc. in OO, and purchased OO (hereinafter referred to as “OO”).

B. From November 20, 2014 to December 3, 2014, the disposition authority issued a claim corporation’s on-site verification related to the refund of the value-added tax for the second period of value-added tax year 2014 to the applicant corporation. As a result, the claim corporation purchased the key machinery at a price higher than the market price and applied the unfair act and calculation denial provision to consider that it purchased the machinery and equipment at a higher price than the market price, and disposed of the outstanding acquisition value and book valueOO as a bonus to the representative, and notified the applicant corporation of the change in the income amount, but it did not withhold and pay the labor income tax, and notified the applicant corporation of the correction and notification of the amount of the labor income tax for the year 2015 to the applicant corporation.

C. The applicant filed an appeal on July 31, 2018 after filing an objection on March 5, 2018.

2. Opinions of the claimant and disposition agency;

A. The claimant's assertion

On August 8, 2014, the claimant asked the appraisal corporation for the reasonable value of the key machinery and apparatus, but the machinery and apparatus have requested for the estimation value of the same machinery and apparatus as the key machinery and apparatus for the use of the same value as that of the key machinery and apparatus by making it inevitable that the machinery and apparatus do not generally perform appraisal and assessment, and acquired the key acquisition value that applied the headquarters to these average values by considering the acquisition value at an appropriate price.

Although a public official in charge of field verification on the purchase of key machinery and equipment and related value-added tax has confirmed the real objects of key machinery and equipment and made it clear that the representative of the applicant corporation and the tax agent had properly assessed the same machinery and equipment, it is not inconsistent with this rule that the provision on the denial of unfair calculation was applied by purchasing the key machinery and equipment at high prices at the time two years have passed thereafter, and in the case of fixed assets for business, the value of the fixed assets does not necessarily decline rapidly like depreciation by the fixed rate

For example, in a case where a new vehicle with a value equivalent to the OO won is purchased, the value of the used vehicle by the fixed rate method after three years is equivalent to OO won, but the actual value is general, and in a case where a heat processing channel is installed as a new product, there is a defect of OO for one year, and if the defect rate of used machinery is less than OO, it is higher than that of the new product, and the actual transaction is higher.

Therefore, the claimant corporation acquired the same machine based on the estimation from the company that produces the same kind of product to assess the value of the key machine objectively, which is not subject to the rejection of unfair calculation.

(b) Opinions of disposition agencies;

The claimant corporation did not conduct an appraisal pursuant to Article 89 of the Enforcement Decree of the Corporate Tax Act on the acquisition value of machinery and equipment, and requested two or more machinery manufacturers (OO andOO) to make an estimate, and appropriated the acquisition value of the acquisition value of the OO that applied the OOO voluntarily to the average value of the estimated value. However, this cannot be recognized as the market price due to the lack of economic rationality. Since it is reasonable to view the OOO as the acquisition value, it is reasonable to view the OOO as the acquisition value of the OOO, it is reasonable to impose the earned income tax OO on the claimant corporation by applying the provision on the denial of unfair calculation.

3. Hearing and determination

A. Key issue

The propriety of the disposition on which the claimant corporation imposed the earned income tax by applying the wrongful calculation denial provision, deeming that the corporation purchased the key machinery and equipment at a higher price;

B. Relevant statutes

(1) Corporate Tax Act

(1) Where the head of a tax office or the Commissioner of the competent Regional Tax Office having jurisdiction over the place for tax payment deems that the tax burden of a domestic corporation has been reduced unreasonably on the income of the corporation in transactions with a specially related person prescribed by Presidential Decree (hereinafter referred to as "specially related person"), he/she may calculate the income amount for each business year of the relevant corporation without regard to the act or calculation of the income amount of the corporation (hereinafter referred to as "unlawful calculation").

(2) In applying paragraph (1), the standard for determination shall be the prices applied or to be applied in sound and generally accepted commercial practices and normal transactions between persons who are not specially related persons (including rates, interest rates, rents, exchange rates and other corresponding rates; hereafter referred to as "market price" in this Article).

(3) A domestic corporation shall submit a detailed statement describing transactions with specially related persons for each business year, as prescribed by Presidential Decree.

(4) In applying paragraphs (1) through (3), matters necessary for the types of wrongful calculation, assessment of market price, etc. shall be prescribed by Presidential Decree.

(2) Enforcement Decree of Corporate Tax Act

(1) "Where it is deemed that the tax burden has been reduced unreasonably" in Article 52 (1) of the Act means cases falling under any of the following subparagraphs:

1. Where assets are purchased or received as investments in kind at a price above the market price or the assets are excessively depreciated;

(2) In the application of Article 52 (2) of the Act, where the market price is unclear, the amount calculated by applying the provisions of each of the following subparagraphs in sequential order shall be applied:

1. Where there is a value appraised by a person under the Public Notice of Values and Appraisal of Real Estate Act, the value thereof (where there are not less than 2 appraised values, the average amount of the appraised values): Provided, That this shall not include stocks, etc.;

2. The amount appraised by the mutatis mutandis application of the provisions of Articles 38 through 39-2, and 61 through 64 of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act.

(3) Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act;

Article 62 (Appraisal of Ships, etc. and Other Tangible Assets) (1) Any ship, aircraft, vehicle, machinery and equipment and standing timber subject to the Standing Timber Act shall be appraised by the methods prescribed by Presidential Decree in consideration of the type, size, transaction conditions, etc. of the relevant property.

(2) Goods, products, paintings and paintings, curios, animals subject to ownership, and other tangible property shall be appraised by methods prescribed by Presidential Decree in consideration of the type, size, transaction conditions, etc. of the relevant property.

(3) The value of an asset, the lease contract of which is de facto concluded or the right of lease is registered shall be the larger of the value assessed based on the relevant rent, etc. as prescribed by Presidential Decree and the value assessed in accordance with paragraphs (1) and (2).

(4) Enforcement Decree of Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act

Article 52 (Appraisal of Other Tangible Assets) (1) "Method prescribed by Presidential Decree" in Article 62 (1) of the Act means the value anticipated to be acquired again where the relevant vessel, aircraft, vehicle, mechanical equipment and standing timber subject to the Standing Timber Act are disposed of, and where such value is not verified, it means the value calculated by applying in sequence the value according to the book value (referring to the value obtained by subtracting depreciation costs from the acquisition value; hereafter the same shall apply in this Article) and the current base value referred to in Article 4 (1) of the Enforcement

C. Facts and determination

(1) According to the review data presented by the applicant corporation and the agency, the following facts are revealed.

(A) On the report for field verification related to the return of the scheduled value-added tax return for the second period of value-added tax on the requesting corporation in 2014, input tax amount of value-added tax on the key acquisition value is allowed. However, since the value falls under the object of denial of wrongful calculation, it is stated that corporate tax data are derivative and cumulative management. The disposition agency disposed of the difference between the key acquisition value and book value as bonus to the representative, and notified the requesting corporation of change of income amount on June 10, 2016.

(B) As of the end of the business year 2014, the value of the key machinery in the standard balance sheet of the requesting corporation is currently counted as the acquisition valueOO, while the value of the key machinery as of the end of the business year 2014 is counted as the standard balance sheet as of the end of the 2013

(C) On August 8, 2014, the claim corporation entered into with the OO representative OO on an agreement to pay OO won after subtracting the amount of debts from the OO won of the appraised value of fixed assets in the contract for the transfer of fixed assets and the succession to obligations (see the following table 1).

3. Plunched Assets and Debt Succession Contracts

(d)The specifications of key machinery, equipment, other tangible assets and other liabilities listed in the annexed sheet of the contract for the transfer of fixed assets and the succession of obligations shall be as shown in the table 2 below.

Question2-1 Revised mechanical specifications

1. Table 2-2 Pedes and specifications of other tangible assets

【B-3. Statement of Other Obligations

(2) As evidence of the calculation of acquisition value, the claimant corporation presented 13 copies of written estimates on the solvents, etc. received from OO and OOO from OO companies, 1 copy of a contract for the supply of equipment to OO entered into between OO and OO corporation (not known of the date of preparation), and 1 copy of a contract for the supply of goods with OO entered into between OOO and OO corporation (for example, October 24, 201) for the goods sales contract (for example, the date of preparation), etc. (for example, the date of preparation of a contract for the supply of equipment between OO and OO corporation (for example, October 24, 201).

3. Calculation of the acquisition value of the title 3

(3) The applicant corporation presented a written confirmation of the employees working for three companies, other than OO, which is the seller, by asserting that the defect rate is less than OO is traded at a price higher than that of a new product in the case of a heat treatment plant, as it is connected to a large loss due to a large amount of defect occurring in the case of a waste processing plant of Aluminium.

(4) In full view of the facts and relevant laws and regulations, the claimant corporation argues that its taxation was improper because it acquired the key machinery and apparatus at issue on the acquisition value, which is the market value equivalent to its market value, by deeming it purchased at a higher price;

The key issue is that the acquisition value is calculated by applying a voluntary ratio to the value of estimates, etc. received from related enterprises, etc., and it is generally difficult to recognize it as the market price, which is the objective exchange value formed in normal transactions or in an objective and reasonable manner, it is difficult to recognize it as the market price, the appraisal value in case of disposal, the expected value to be acquired again in case of disposal, and the book value are applied in sequential order. The appraisal value for key machinery and equipment and the key acquisition value cannot be seen as the market price for key machinery and equipment, so the disposition agency is bound to evaluate the key machinery

Therefore, it is judged that the Claimant did not make any other error because the Claimant purchased the key machinery from the related party at a high price, and this case imposed by applying the unfair calculation denial rule.

4. Conclusion

This case shall be decided in accordance with Article 81 and Article 65 (1) 2 of the Framework Act on National Taxes because the petition for the trial results has no merit.