(영문) 서울고등법원 2012.02.23 2009누40751

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울고등법원 2012.02.23 2009누40751

부가가치세부과처분취소

Text

1. The remainder of the judgment of the court of first instance excluding the part of paragraph (1) shall be modified as follows:

2. The defendant.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is an entrepreneur who runs an attorney-at-law in Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government HK Building 504 from May 27, 1994.

B. As a result of conducting a tax investigation for the taxable year from March 18, 2006 to April 14, 2006 with respect to the Plaintiff, the head of the Dobong Tax Office determined that the sum of 614,480,122 won (125,345,012 won for the second period of February 2001, 123,016,960 won for the second period of February 2002, 2002, 138,858,830 won for the second period of February 1, 2003, 119,43,020, 2030 won for the first period of January 19, 2003, 103, value-added tax for the second period of February 107, 208, 306, and notified the Defendant of the omission in the sales (hereinafter “the instant decision”).

C. Accordingly, on September 8, 2006, the Defendant imposed on the Plaintiff the value-added tax of 24,316,930 won for the second term in 2001, value-added tax of 1st year in 2002, 22,751,980 won for the first term in 2002, value-added tax of 24,404,430 won for the second term in 202, value-added tax of 17,200,740 won for the first term in 203, value-added tax of 14,93,940 won for the second term in 203, respectively.

On the other hand, the Plaintiff asserted that it was erroneous for the Commissioner of the National Tax Service to have determined that the portion of the input fees unrelated to the fees was omitted in the imposition disposition stated in the preceding paragraph, and filed a request for examination (Additional No. 2006-0372), but the said request was dismissed on December 27, 2006.

E. During the litigation of this case, the defendant accepted part of the plaintiff's assertion as stated in the annexed Form 2, and revoked part of the omission amount of import of this case and refunded the relevant tax amount as follows.

(C) The remaining portion of each disposition taken in the above paragraph (c) is “each of the dispositions in this case.” The 2nd period of February 2001, 2002, the 1nd period of February 2002, 2003, and the 2nd period of February 2003, 2003, the cancelled amount of the tax refunded, the cancelled amount of the tax refunded, and the cancelled amount of the tax refunded.

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 2012.02.23 2009누40751

-서울행정법원 2009.11.26 2007구합13227

-서울고등법원 2016.01.29 2015누1344

-서울고등법원 2012. 02. 23. 선고 2009누40751 판결

-서울고등법원 2016. 01. 29. 선고 2015누1344 판결