2015 Mine1121 (O4. 14)

Whether the services of balcony expansion are subject to value-added tax exemption.

Even if all households were supplied as a balcony expansion type, the services of balcony expansion are separate from the supply of apartment buildings in this case, which are subject to value-added tax.

Article 1 of the Value-Added Tax Act

Gwangju District Court-2015-Gu Partnership-943 ( October 31, 2016)

○○ Co., Ltd.

○ Head of tax office

2016.03.17

2016.031

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Cheong-gu Office

The Defendant’s imposition of value-added tax for the second period of No. 2012 against the Plaintiff on November 7, 2014 is revoked.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. During the second taxable period of the value-added tax in 2012, the Plaintiff supplied an apartment building of ○○○○○-gu, ○○○○○-dong, ○○○○-dong, and ○○○○-dong, which is a national housing size (hereinafter “the apartment building of this case”) (hereinafter “instant apartment”), and performed a balcony expansion project (hereinafter “instant service”) by setting the entire household units as a balcony expansion type.

B. The Plaintiff determined that the supply of the instant service is included in the supply of the instant apartment subject to value-added tax exemption and declared the value-added tax exemption on the instant service.

C. On November 7, 2014, the Defendant determined that the instant service was supplied separately from the supply of the instant apartment, and determined that it was subject to value-added tax, and notified the Plaintiff of the correction and notification of the value-added tax ○○○ (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

D. On February 4, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal on February 4, 2015, but the Tax Tribunal rendered a decision to dismiss the Plaintiff’s claim on April 14, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 6 (including each number for which there are separate numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. Summary of the plaintiff's assertion

1) Since the supply of the instant service constitutes the supply of services essential to the supply of the instant apartment that is a national housing, value-added tax on the supply of the instant service ought to be exempted.

section 3.

2) Even if not, the instant service is subject to Article 106(1)4 of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act;

The value-added tax on the supply of the instant service should be exempted inasmuch as it falls under the category of "renovation service under the Building Act" as stipulated in Article 106 (5) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act.

(b) Related statutes;

It is as shown in the attached Table related statutes.

C. Determination

1) Services that are necessarily incidental to the supply of the instant apartment.

Whether it constitutes supply

A) Major provisions of relevant laws and regulations and relevant laws and regulations

Article 106 (1) 4 of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act, Article 106 (4) 1 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, and Article 51-2 (3) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act stipulate "supply of housing below the scale of national housing under the Housing Act" as one of the objects eligible for the exemption of value

Meanwhile, Article 1(4) of the former Value-Added Tax Act (wholly amended by Act No. 11873, Jun. 7, 2013; hereinafter the same) provides that the supply of goods or services, which are the main transaction, shall be deemed to be included in the supply of goods or services, which is the main transaction. Article 12(3) provides that the supply of goods or services, which are essentially annexed to the supply of goods or services exempt from taxation, shall be deemed to be included in the supply of goods or services. Article 3(2) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act (wholly amended by Presidential Decree No. 24638, Jun. 28, 2013; hereinafter the same) provides that “the supply of goods or services, which are deemed to be included in the supply of goods or services, shall be deemed to be included in the supply of goods or services, which are the main transaction practice, is deemed to be incidental to the supply

Under the principle of no taxation without law, or under the principle of no taxation without law, the interpretation of tax laws shall be interpreted in accordance with the text of the law unless there are special circumstances, and reasonable grounds therefor.

It is not allowed to expand and explosive interpretation without permission, and in particular, it accords with the principle of equity in taxation to strictly interpret the provision that is clearly considered as a preferential provision among the requirements for reduction and exemption (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Du11594, Oct. 9, 2008).

B) Determination as to the legitimacy of the instant disposition

The following circumstances, i.e., the Enforcement Decree of the former Building Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 208), i.e., ① the Enforcement Decree of the former Building Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 2008).

10. Article 2(1)15 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Building Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 21098), Article 2 subparag. 14 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Building Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 2443, Mar. 23, 2013) provides that the procedures for alteration of the structure of the balcony, etc. and standards for installation (No. 2005-400, Sept. 10, 2010, the Ministry of Construction and Transportation announced No. 2010-622, Sept. 26, 2012), Article 7 of the former Housing Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 21243, Jan. 26, 2012) provides that the Plaintiff’s purchase price of the balcony shall not be included in the sale price of the balcony separately from the apartment house supplied by the business entity, and that the Plaintiff may not be included in the sale price of the balcony, separately from the apartment house supplied by the business entity.

2) For the purpose of remodeling under Article 106(1)4 of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act

Whether it constitutes 's calendar' or not

In full view of the following circumstances that are acknowledged in addition to the purport of the entire arguments in the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes, Article 106 (1) 4 of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act and Article 106 (5) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act provide that "a remodeling service under the Building Act is one of the objects of the exemption from value-added tax", and Article 2 (1) 10 of the Building Act provides that "a remodeling means a substantial repair or a partial extension for the purpose of preventing the deterioration of a building or for the improvement of functions, etc." (2) the service of this case is conducted in the course of the construction of the apartment of this case by the plaintiff by selling the apartment of this case, and it does not fall under "large repair, repair, or extension of the structure or external form of the existing building" and it does not fall under "Partial extension". Accordingly, the plaintiff's assertion on this part is without merit.

3. Conclusion

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