The main content of the service performed by the Plaintiff is to arrange the reservation for cooking accommodation, so it constitutes other travel assistance service business.

The main contents of the instant services are as follows: (a) it is reasonable to view that the Plaintiff constitutes a travel agent and other travel auxiliary service business under the Korean Standard Industrial Classification Table in accordance with the "receivation for the use of tour-related facilities," (b) the "receivation for the use of tour-related facilities," (c) the "receivation for accommodation," and (d) the "receivation for accommodation," and not subject to zero-rate tax rate.

Article 24 of the Value-Added Tax Act

2016Guhap84023 Disposition Revocation of Value-Added Tax Imposition

AAAAAA

BB Director of the Tax Office

April 21, 2017

May 19, 2017

1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

Cheong-gu Office

Each value-added tax imposed by the Defendant on the Plaintiff shall be revoked.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On March 3, 2015, the Plaintiff was established for the purpose of hotel business, marketing business, etc. at home and abroad, and registered the type of business overseas as a hotel business.

B. The Plaintiff entered into a sales agency contract (hereinafter collectively referred to as "each contract of this case") with the CCC Ri and DDR set located in the U.S. City, Gu, Gu, and Indonesian State (hereinafter collectively referred to as "each of the above Ri set") and provided services, such as accommodation reservation, etc. of Korean travel agents (hereinafter referred to as "the instant service").

C. The Plaintiff reported the value-added tax on the first term and second term and the first preliminary return period in 2015 and the first preliminary return period in 2016, and reported the entire sales amount of the Plaintiff related to the provision of the instant service to zero tax rate.

D. The Defendant issued a notice of correction and notification of the value-added tax amounting to KRW 24,464,250 for the first period of April 4, 2016, and value-added tax amounting to KRW 35,783,180 for the second period of the year 2015 (including additional tax) on the ground that the Plaintiff engaged in a pre-sale agent business for overseas cooking and lodging, which is exempt from the application of zero-rate tax because it falls under a travel agency and other travel auxiliary service business under Article 33(2)1 (h) of the Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as “instant disposition”) and issued a notice of correction and notification of the value-added tax amounting to KRW 11,801,160 for the first period of the preliminary return on July 2, 2016 (including additional tax) (hereinafter referred to as “instant disposition”).

E. On July 11, 2016, the Plaintiff dissatisfied with the disposition No. 1 and filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal on July 11, 2016. Upon the dismissal of the said appeal on October 26, 2016, the Plaintiff sought revocation of the disposition No. 1 on December 14, 2016 and filed the instant lawsuit.

F. Meanwhile, on October 1, 2016, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the correction and notification of the value-added tax amounting to KRW 11,229,760 for the first period of value-added tax (the amount calculated by adding the amount of value-added tax for the first period of value-added tax in 2016 and deducting the amount of already paid tax), and the value-added tax amounting to KRW 8,153,180 for the second period of preliminary return in 2017 (including the additional tax) on January 3, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as “each of the above dispositions” collectively, and hereinafter referred to as “each of the instant dispositions”).

D. On December 18, 2016, when the instant lawsuit was pending, the Plaintiff filed a claim seeking revocation of the disposition of imposition of KRW 11,229,760 for the first term portion of value-added tax in December 18, 2016, and filed a claim seeking revocation of the disposition of imposition of KRW 8,153,180 for the second term portion of value-added tax in February 6, 2017.

Facts that there is no dispute over the basis of recognition, Gap evidence 1, 4, 6-1 through 5, 7-1, 8-1, Eul evidence 1 through 10, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Judgment on the defendant's main defense of safety

A. The defendant's assertion

The second disposition is unlawful because it does not go through the procedure of the previous trial, and thus the second disposition among the lawsuits of this case is sought to be revoked.

B. Determination

In tax administration, where a tax authority and the Tax Tribunal provided an opportunity to re-determine the basic facts and legal issues and where there are justifiable grounds, such as where a taxpayer appears to be harshly in having the taxpayer undergo the procedure of pre-trial trial, a taxpayer may file an administrative litigation claiming the revocation of taxation without going through the procedure of pre-trial (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 9Du1557, Sept. 26, 200; 2009Du13436, Jan. 27, 201).

According to the facts established earlier, although the two dispositions are separate dispositions that differ from those of the first disposition, and the dispositions subject to the second disposition do not constitute cases where the dispositions were conducted in the course of step-by-step and development, or where the dispositions subject to the second disposition were modified during the lawsuit, each of the dispositions in this case is an issue whether the services provided to the resort constitute zero-rate tax rate, and thus, the grounds alleged by the Plaintiff are common, and the content of the instant services provided by the Plaintiff does not vary over the taxable period subject to each of the dispositions in this case. Meanwhile, the dispositions made on October 1, 2016 among the second dispositions was pending after the Plaintiff filed a request with the Tax Tribunal for a trial on the first disposition. Considering that the dispositions made on January 3, 2017 by the Plaintiff after the dismissal of the Tax Tribunal, the Plaintiff cannot be deemed to have granted the opportunity for the Tax Tribunal to determine facts and legal issues by going through the first instance trial procedure, and even if the Plaintiff had the Plaintiff seek for revocation of the previous dispositions, it cannot be deemed unlawful.

3. Judgment on the merits

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The plaintiff, as the domestic office of the Ri of this case, is the agent of the Ri of this case, who is the agent of the Ri of this case, directly represents the domestic events and the customers, and performs the affairs of the Ri house sales, such as the sales of guest rooms, and performs all kinds of business support activities, such as market research, public relations, marketing, etc. for the Ri house. Thus, the services provided by the plaintiff to the Ri house of this case fall under the "business facility management and business support services" under Article 33 (2) 1 (h) of the Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act to support the hotel business operated by the Ri house, but does not fall under the "business facility management and business support services" under Article 33 (2) 1 (h) of the Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act, and thus the zero tax rate shall be applied. Accordingly, each disposition of this case, which

B. Relevant statutes

The entries in the attached Table-related statutes are as follows.

C. Facts of recognition

1) Each of the instant contracts commonly includes the following:

Lart shall designate the Plaintiff as an exclusive sales agency (Genal Sos Domar) that can promote, sell, or resell hotel accommodation in the Korean market on the following terms: (i) the Plaintiff shall be entitled to exclusively sell or resell the hotel accommodation on the Korean market:

- The plaintiff introduces a set to the Korean market through advertising and publicity.

- Liart provides the Plaintiff with a special guest rate only, and does not share the charges with other travel agencies and travel-related enterprises in Korea.

- Liart shall provide the plaintiff with the most competitive charge for accommodation, food and drink, etc.

- The plaintiff shall bear part of the cost of the agreed advertising and marketing. This shall assign a certain budget during the term of the contract to support the plaintiff's PR, marketing and advertising.

- The plaintiff has the right to deal with all reservations of the Korean travel agency.

Marketing Cost Sharing

- The Plaintiff shall carry out various marketing and business activities in order to increase sales. At the time of entering into a contract, marketing activities may occur as follows. The sharing of marketing costs requires written approval signed by the general manager, etc., and not arbitrarily charge the other party with the cost. The payment method of the cost incurred from the following activities must be agreed on both sides.

Fam Tour

- In the case of reporters, travel agents, travel travel, media photographing, magazines and other photographs, the Plaintiff shall bear the expenses of return flight tickets, the outside events of the set, and the set shall take charge of accommodation, cooking beverages, internal events, etc.

Charges and Payments

- Liart shall provide the Plaintiff with an exclusive fee and, if it is unable to maintain the agreed fee or professional fee, notify the Plaintiff not later than three months prior to the conclusion of the agreement.

- The Plaintiff shall transfer directly to a bank account presented by Liart.

- The Plaintiff must pay and maintain the deposit of $50,000 to the Lart.

- Upon receipt of a request from an appropriate amount once every two weeks (1 to 15 days, the last day from 16th day), the Plaintiff must pay the amount.

2) The Plaintiff and the instant resort set the specific monthly target number of lodging days during the term of the contract, divided into the gender number/non-water season, etc., and set the specific guest room charges, etc. according to the type of the Sinle and guest room. The Plaintiff and the instant resort specifically set the fee imposed in the event of cancellation of the reservation management and reservation, the time limit for cancellation, etc.

3) The Plaintiff received the application for reservation from the domestic tourr in English, translated the content thereof into the Ri of this case, and then requested the reservation and transmitted the content thereof to the Ri of this case, and obtained approval from the Ri of this case, the reservation of the guest room shall be finalized. The passenger room fee claimed from the domestic tourr is the fee that the Plaintiff voluntarily determined and added his income to the guest room fee agreed in advance between the Ri of this case. The Ri of this case shall issue to the Plaintiff a written claim for the application of the agreed fee to the guest room for which the reservation has become final and conclusive to the Plaintiff every two weeks, and the Plaintiff shall transfer the remainder, excluding his income, out of the fee received from the domestic tourr, to the Ri of this case.

4) In addition to the affairs related to the reservation of a guest room, the Plaintiff: (a) invited travel agencies, etc. in Korea to introduce and publicize the instant resort; (b) participated in the domestic travel agency’s exhibition to publicize the instant resort; or (c) promoted local photographs, etc. to promote the instant resort, such as domestic travel agents, etc.; and (d) requested the instant resort to provide free accommodation to the exhibition with the notice of the plan and to provide the relevant program as free gift; and (b) requested the Plaintiff to bear some of the cost of free accommodation and photographing expenses to be provided. In addition, the Plaintiff, at his own expense, promoted sales of the instant resort, including accommodation, through home shopping, along with the domestic travel agencies; and (c) requested a special fee for the relevant resort strategy. In addition, the Plaintiff requested the response to other competitive hotel strategy, such as free accommodation.

5) The extension of each of the instant contracts depends on whether the Plaintiff would achieve the target number of accommodation days set out in the initial contract. The instant resort continuously checked and confirmed whether the Plaintiff achieved the target number of accommodation days.

Each entry and the purport of the whole pleadings of Gap evidence 10 to 19 (including each number) based on recognition

D. Determination

1) Article 24(1)3 of the Value-Added Tax Act provides that the zero-rate tax rate shall apply to the supply of goods or services for acquiring foreign currencies, as prescribed by Presidential Decree, and Article 33(2)1 (h) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 26983, Feb. 17, 2016; Presidential Decree No. 27838, Feb. 7, 2017; hereinafter the same) provides that "business facility management and business support services" as services eligible for zero-rate tax rate shall be excluded. Accordingly, even if the instant service falls under "business facility management and business support services", it is excluded from zero-rate tax rate.

In addition, Article 4 (1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act provides that the classification of the business that supplies services shall be based on the Korean Standard Industrial Classification as of the starting date of the relevant taxable period publicly notified by the Commissioner of the Statistics Korea, except as otherwise provided for in the Enforcement Decree, and there is no special provision in the Enforcement Decree of the same Act with respect to the "business facility management and business support service business", " travelers and other travel auxiliary service business", and ultimately

According to the 9th Korean Standard Industrial Classification (Notice No. 2007-532, Feb. 1, 2008) that applies at the time of the commencement of the taxable period of value-added tax, which is the object of the disposition of this case, the 2007-53(2) is classified as follows:

N. Business facility management and business support service business;

74. Business facilities management and landscaping;

(hereinafter referred to as "serious")

75. Business support service;

751. Human resources supply and employment mediation business;

(hereinafter referred to as "serious")

752. Travel agencies and other travel assistance services;

7521. Travel Services

75211. General and overseas travel projects

75212. Domestic travel business

7529. Other travel assistance and reservation services

75290 Other travel assistance and reservation services

753. Guard, security service and search service;

(hereinafter referred to as "serious")

759. Other business support service activities.

7591. Business assistance service activities

75911. Document making business

75911. Uniform business

75919 Other administrative support service business

7599 Other business support service activities

7591 Call Center and telereshing service business

7592. Exhibition and event agency business

7593. Credit Investigation and Collection Agency

7594 Packaging and filling business

7599 Other classified business support service activities

According to the explanation of the Korean Standard Industrial Classification, "general and overseas travel business" refers to the industrial activities that offer tourists traveling at home and abroad the use of travel-related facilities, guidance on travel, conclusion of contracts, and other convenience for travel. As a example, general events and overseas travel agencies, and "other travel assistance and reservation services" refers to other industrial activities that provide travel assistance services, such as the operation of tourist information and pool system, ticketing, accommodation arrangement, travel guide service, accommodation reservation agency. On the other hand, "other administrative assistance services" refers to the daily administrative services such as preparation and recording activities at the request of customers, the distribution of human resources and goods, and "other service business assistance activities" refers to industrial activities that are not separately classified, and such examples include gas, electricity and water supply, merchandise coupon sales, merchandise coupon sales, merchandise coupon sales.

2) Considering the following circumstances revealed from the facts acknowledged earlier in this case, it is reasonable to view that the main contents of the instant service offered by the Plaintiff to the instant resort constitutes “tourism and other travel auxiliary service business” under the Korean Standard Industrial Classification Table, based on the following: (a) the Plaintiff is acting as a broker or intermediary for the use of the instant resort accommodation between domestic travel agencies and the instant resort; (b) thus, it is reasonable to view that the Plaintiff’s main contents of the instant service offered to the instant resort constitute “drawers and other travel auxiliary service business” under the Korean Standard Industrial Classification Table. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s assertion on a different premise is rejected.

A) The contents of the Plaintiff’s business related to the instant resort are as follows: (a) through the Plaintiff’s transmission of the instant resort to accommodation to the instant resort from domestic travel agents upon receiving an application for accommodation reservations for the instant resort; (b) mediating and arranging accommodation reservations; and (c) remitting the agreed guest room fees among the money collected from domestic travel agents; and (d) in order to expand the sales of the instant resort to accommodation reservations, to conduct public relations and promotional activities against domestic travel agencies, etc.; and (e) to receive the difference between the collected money and the fee agreed in advance with the instant resort, excluding the fee.

B) However, the Plaintiff’s sales related to the instant resort are solely generated from accommodation reservations, and the instant resort is not individual publicity or promotional activities conducted by the Plaintiff, but rather determined whether to extend the contract by determining the Plaintiff’s outcome and determining whether to extend the contract based on the achievement of the target number of accommodation days stipulated in the instant contract. In particular, even though the Plaintiff’s fee paid to the instant resort has been determined in advance, the Plaintiff may autonomously determine the guest room fee to be sold to the domestic tourr, as the Plaintiff’s preference to the instant resort is high, so the Plaintiff may increase the income by fixing a high rate, and it is important to achieve the target number of accommodation days even to extend each of the instant resort contracts. Considering these circumstances, it is reasonable to deem that the Plaintiff’s main service provided to the instant resort is mediating or arranging accommodation reservations, and the advertising and promotion activities conducted by the Plaintiff is ultimately business activities for the expansion and extension of its sales and contract.

C) Although the instant contract provides that “the Plaintiff shall conduct advertising, public relations, and marketing activities for the instant resort, and Lart shall provide support therefor, the Plaintiff shall not perform such activities under the specific direction of Lart, but shall be determined and promoted by the Plaintiff himself, but if it is necessary to provide Lart’s cooperation or share of expenses, it may be reported to the contents. In addition, in light of the fact that the instant contract provides that the Lart shall separately bear part of the expenses for advertising, public relations, and marketing activities, the Plaintiff and the instant resort shall cooperate and share the expenses for each of the instant resort’s business, and it is difficult to deem that the Plaintiff provided such services in the instant resort unilaterally.

In fact, the Plaintiff’s active development of travel goods with domestic travel agencies and promotion of the instant cooking through domestic advertisement or exhibition was promoted by the Plaintiff itself, and the relevant expenses were also borne by the Plaintiff. The instant cooking only provided special passenger room fees or free accommodation tickets at the Plaintiff’s request. Although the Plaintiff and the instant resort is going through prior consultation with the travel agencies, etc. for the purpose of the cooking, it is difficult to regard the Plaintiff’s business as services provided for the instant resort unilaterally by the Plaintiff not only for the instant resort but also for the purpose of expanding its sales. Accordingly, it cannot be said that the Plaintiff’s business constituted “other services for supporting hotel business” or “other services for supporting hotel business” or “other services for supporting other services for supporting the instant resort business” under the Korean Standard Industrial Classification.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.