logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.01.11 2016가합535833
부당이득금
Text

1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiffs entered into each sales contract (hereinafter “each sales contract of this case”) as shown in the attached Table 1 with respect to the commercial buildings located in Quwon-gu, Sungnam-si and two parcels (hereinafter “instant commercial buildings”), and registered as a real estate rental business operator.

B. The Plaintiffs received a tax invoice from Nemer after paying the commercial development cost, down payment, and intermediate payment including value-added tax pursuant to each of the above sales contracts, and deducted the down payment, etc. from the input tax amount in the year when the date of conclusion of each sales contract falls.

C. The Plaintiffs’ “the date of cancellation of the contract” in the attached Table 1 [Attachment 1] was cancelled as of each day, and received the revised tax invoice from Nemer. D.

In order to recover the amount deducted as input tax amount due to the cancellation of each sales contract of this case from the plaintiffs, the head of Sungnam District Tax Office notified the plaintiffs of the decision of refund due to the correction of value-added tax and additional tax (hereinafter "the disposition of this case") of the amount in the attached Table 1. The plaintiffs paid the amount in the attached Table 1.

[Ground of recognition] Evidence Nos. 1 through 36, Evidence Nos. 1 through 19 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. When entering into each of the instant sales contracts, the Plaintiffs asserted that they paid business development costs, down payment, and intermediate payment, including value-added tax, to business sites, and business sites paid value-added tax to the Defendant as above, and the Defendant had already obtained tax satisfaction.

The plaintiffs did not receive a refund of value-added tax even after the above sales contract was cancelled, and the defendant was cancelled the above sales contract.

arrow