A. Whether a business operator who has not registered his/her business may issue a business account statement or impose penalty tax not submitted (negative);

(b) Method of imposing additional taxes for insincere return and payment of value-added tax;

(a) If the scrap metal has been supplied to another company without filing a business registration, no additional tax may be imposed on the failure to issue a tax invoice or failure to submit a tax invoice, aside from the imposition of a non-registered and non-verification penalty pursuant to Articles 22(1) and 5 of the Value-Added Tax Act.

B. The purport that Article 22(3) proviso of the Value-Added Tax Act applies simultaneously to subparagraphs 1 and 2 of Article 22(3) is construed to refer to the cases of preliminary return and preliminary return and preliminary return and preliminary return and final return and payment under Article 19, and the cases of both preliminary return and payment under Article 18 and the final return and payment under Article 19 of the Value-Added Tax Act are not to refer to cases of both the preliminary return and payment of the value-added tax and the final return and payment under Article 19 of the Value-Added Tax Act at the same time. Therefore, the penalty tax is not imposed only once on the first preliminary return and payment of

(a)Articles 22(1), 5, 22(3), 18, and 19 of the Value-Added Tax Act;

B. Supreme Court Decision 84Nu323 delivered on December 26, 1984

[Judgment of the court below]

The director of the tax office.

Seoul High Court Decision 85Gu280 decided April 15, 1986

The part of the judgment of the court below concerning additional tax in good faith is reversed, and that part of the case is remanded to the Seoul High Court.

The defendant's remaining appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal dismissed shall be assessed against the defendant.

The grounds of appeal by the defendant litigant are examined.

(1) On the first ground for appeal

According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, the court below confirmed that the plaintiff supplied scrap metal to the non-party special lecture corporation, the non-party special lecture corporation without registering its business, and held that the defendant's non-issuance of tax invoice and the non-submission of additional tax are illegal, since the non-issuance of tax invoice and non-issuance of additional tax are not allowed, aside from the imposition of non-registration and non-verification additional tax pursuant to Articles 22 (1) and 5 of the Value-Added Tax Act. This decision of the court below is just and there is no error in the misapprehension of the legal principles as to the application

(2) On the second ground for appeal:

The purport that Article 22 (3) 1 and 2 of the Value-Added Tax Act simultaneously applies is that the preliminary return and the scheduled return and the scheduled return and the final return and payment under Article 19 of the Value-Added Tax Act are simultaneously applied, and it is interpreted that the preliminary return and the payment under Article 18 and the final return and payment under Article 19 of the Value-Added Tax Act are not concurrently applicable to the cases where the final return and the payment under Article 19 of the Value-Added Tax Act are made. Therefore, the additional tax shall not be imposed only once on the case where the preliminary return and the payment of the value-added tax are made without the preliminary return and the final return and payment of the value-added tax are made or made at the same time, and it shall be subject to the imposition of the additional tax independently

However, according to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below held that the plaintiff did not make a preliminary return or payment of value-added tax on KRW 112,077,364, the value of the scrap metal supplied during the preliminary return period for the first period of 1979, and that even if the final return or payment was not made, the penalty tax for the failure to make a return and payment was passed through and would be imposed only once on the amount equivalent to 10/100 of the amount of the tax, even if the final return or payment was not made, which affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the legal principles as to the penalty tax for failure to make a return under

(3) Therefore, since the defendant's appeal of this case is well-grounded in the second part of the argument of appeal, the part of the judgment below as to the penalty tax in good faith shall be reversed, and this part of the case shall be remanded to the Seoul High Court, and the defendant's remaining appeal shall be dismissed, and the costs of appeal as to the dismissal of appeal shall be assessed against the losing

Justices Lee Jae-hee (Presiding Justice)