Changwon District Court 2012Guhap3109 ( October 16, 2013)

Cho High Court Decision 2012 Deputy 1654 (Law No. 15, 2012)

Even if a de facto marital couple was a de facto marital couple at the time of construction, the return and payment of value-added tax shall be liable for payment according to actual attribution.

(See) Even in a case where one party supplies goods or services in the name of the other party’s entrepreneur, the person who actually supplies the goods or services under the substance over form principle bears the duty to report and pay value-added tax. Therefore, it is difficult to deem that the return and payment obligor of value-added tax differs depending on whether the nominal owner is a husband or wife of a de facto marital relationship or a law.

Article 14 (1) and (2) of the Framework Act on National Taxes

(original)Revocation of revocation of the imposition of value-added tax;

KimA

Head of tax office

Changwon District Court Decision 2012Guhap3109 Decided April 16, 2013

April 10, 2014

May 15, 2014

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The judgment of the first instance is revoked. The defendant's imposition of value-added tax for the first period of September 6, 201 against the plaintiff on September 6, 2011 shall be revoked.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasoning for this Court's explanation is as follows: "No. 15-2 of A, No. 15-2 of A, No. 30 of A, No. 20 of A, and No. 12 of A, No. 4, No. 10 of A, and No. 17 and No. 18 of A, are the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for addition of "Evidence No. 17 and No. 18 of A, No. 30 of the judgment of the court of first instance", and the conclusion is as follows:

Therefore, the judgment of the first instance court is justifiable, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.