beta
Text
1. Of the instant lawsuit, the part seeking revocation of KRW 16,236,30 of value-added tax for KRW 16,230 shall be dismissed.
2...
Reasons
1. Circumstances of each disposition of this case;
A. The Plaintiff is an organization of persons of distinguished service to the State which consists of wounded persons at the time B under Article 4(1)12 of the Act on the Honorable Treatment and Support of Persons, etc. of Distinguished Service
B. The Plaintiff was approved by the Minister of Patriots and Veterans Affairs as a profit-making business related to C’s environmental globalization services on or around May 2005.
C. D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) has paid a certain amount of money to the Plaintiff while carrying out the above profit-making business.
D paid part of the money paid to the Plaintiff from January 2009 to the Plaintiff’s members, and paid KRW 11,077,000 to the Plaintiff and KRW 93,140,000 to the Plaintiff’s members during the 2nd VAT taxable period in 2009. During 2010, the Plaintiff paid KRW 11,077,000 to the Plaintiff and KRW 85,256,00 to the Plaintiff’s members during the 1st VAT taxable period in 2010.
E. The Defendant: (a) reported each of the above money paid by D to Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s members during each of the above taxable periods as consideration for “service provision; and (b) notified the Plaintiff of the correction of KRW 17,492,490 of the value-added tax No. 209 on January 20, 2015 (the Defendant issued a correction notice of KRW 19,241,730 on the first correction notice; (c) determined the tax base of the value-added tax, excluding the value-added tax paid to Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s members; hereinafter “instant first disposition”); and (d) adjusted the reduction of the tax base as above, excluding the value-added tax paid to Plaintiff and Plaintiff
7.3. In 2010, a disposition was issued to correct the value-added tax of KRW 16,236,330 (hereinafter “instant second disposition”).
F. On March 30, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal on the instant disposition No. 1, but the same year.
6.15. A decision of dismissal was made by the Tax Tribunal;
[Reasons for Recognition] No dispute exists, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Gap evidence No. 6, and the purport of the whole pleadings.
2. Whether the lawsuit against the part seeking revocation of the second disposition among the instant lawsuit is lawful.