Simple omission of taxation and establishment of non-taxable practices

A non-taxable practice can not be established solely with the mere omission of taxation, and it is established only when the tax authorities have known that the tax can be imposed on the matter, and such intent is expressed explicitly or implicitly.

Article 18 (3) of the Framework Act on National Taxes

Supreme Court Decision 84Nu545 Delivered on May 28, 1985

Plaintiff-Appellant Kim Dong-dong et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant

Attorney Kim Tae-tae, Counsel for the defendant-appellant of Busan Metropolitan City

Daegu High Court Decision 86Gu157 delivered on November 27, 1987

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

The practice of non-taxation can not be established only with the mere omission of taxation, and it is established only when the tax authority knew that the tax can impose the tax on the matter, and such intention is expressed explicitly or implicitly.

The court below is just in holding that it cannot be deemed that the non-taxable practice as alleged by the plaintiff was established on the sole basis of the fact that the court below continued to impose and collect only property tax at a general rate for four consecutive years after 1982, which became a public land of this case, and the plaintiff believed that the above land is not a public land. There is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to non-taxable practice like theory.

In addition, it is just that the court below held that the tax disposition in this case cannot be deemed as unlawful on the ground that the defendant continued to impose only property tax on the general tax rate before the tax disposition in this case was issued, and the fact that the tax disposition in this case was made after the lapse of April 30, 1985, which was the statutory deadline for the report under the Act on Special Measures for Arrangement of Specific Buildings, does not constitute a violation of the principle of trust and good faith, such as the theory

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 on the bench.

Justices Song Man-Ba (Presiding Justice)