Seoul High Court 2015Nu50988 (26 May 2016)

(1) The filing of an objection by facsimile shall be effective.

(b) The filing of an objection by facsimile shall be effective.

2016Du4483

Co.**

00. Head of tax office

Seoul High Court Decision 2015Nu50988 Decided May 26, 2016

o October 13, 2016

2016.05.26

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed. 2. Costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

All of the records of this case, the judgment of the court below, and the grounds of appeal were examined, but it is evident that the appellant's ground of appeal falls under Article 4 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Trial Procedure, and therefore, the appeal is dismissed pursuant to Article 5 of the same Act, and the costs of appeal are borne by the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices. The Seoul High Court-2015-Nu

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

This court's reasoning is as follows, and this court's reasoning is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for adding a part of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, it is accepted in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Article 85-4 (1) of the Framework Act on National Taxes provides that "In addition, paragraphs 4 through 13 of the same Article have been revised as follows. (and Article 85-4 (1) of the same Act provides that "where a taxpayer or a person obligated to submit data for taxation (hereinafter referred to as "taxpayer, etc.") receives the tax base return, revised tax base return, tax base return, documents related to request for correction and other documents prescribed by Presidential Decree, a tax official shall issue a receipt to the taxpayer, etc.: Provided, That in cases prescribed by Presidential Decree, such as postal declaration, the receipt may not be issued." Article 65-8 (1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Framework Act on National Taxes provides that "documents prescribed by Presidential Decree" means documents falling under any of the following subparagraphs, "written objection, written request for examination and written request for judgment", and Paragraph 2 of the same Article provides that "when a taxpayer or a person obligated to submit data for taxation pursuant to the tax-related Acts and subordinate statutes raises an objection by telephone or facsimile, a tax official is not subject to withdrawal of a tax return by mail or facsimile."

○ Part 6, 6, 35 to 7, 6, shall be deleted.

Article 85-4 (Issuance of Certificate of Receipt of Documents) The following shall be added below the sixth 34th sentence of the judgment of the first instance.

(1) When a tax official receives the returns of tax base, revised returns of tax base and requests for correction, or the returns of tax base, revised returns of tax base and requests for correction and other documents prescribed by Presidential Decree from a taxpayer or a person liable to submit the data for taxation (hereinafter referred to as "tax payer, etc."), he/she shall issue the receipt thereof: Provided, That in cases prescribed by Presidential Decree, such as the return by mail, the same

Article 65-8 (Issuance of Certificate of Receipt of Documents)

(1) "Documents prescribed by Presidential Decree" in the main sentence of Article 85-4 (1) of the Act means the following documents:

1. A written objection, a written request for examination and a request for trial;

(2) "Cases prescribed by Presidential Decree, such as postal reporting, etc." in the proviso to Article 85-4 (1) of the Act means any of the following cases:

1. End when a taxpayer submits a tax base report, etc. by postal service or fax;

2. Conclusion

Since the judgment of the first instance is justifiable, the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is groundless.

AA Corporation

The Director of the sericultural Tax Office

The judgment of the first instance court, Seoul Administrative Court-2014-Gu -71351

2016.04.28

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked. The defendant's disposition of imposition of value-added tax of KRW 34,300,160 on November 1, 2013 against the plaintiff on November 1, 2012 and KRW 89,889,840 on the aggregate of KRW 5,589,680 on the first half of 2012 against the plaintiff shall be revoked.