Effects of the internal determination of capital gains tax not notified to taxpayers;

As a matter of principle, tax imposition disposition, which is an administrative disposition with the other party, takes effect only when it notifies the other party of the determination of income tax, Article 128 of the Income Tax Act provides that the person liable for tax payment shall notify in writing his tax base and amount of tax and other necessary matters in the case of the determination of income tax, and Article 183(2) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act provides that the above notification shall be given even if there is no amount of tax to be paid. Thus, even if the contents of the internal determination of capital gains tax are the same as those of the scheduled amount of tax to

Article 128 of the Income Tax Act, Article 183 (2) of the Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act

Plaintiff

The Director of the Korean Tax Office

Seoul High Court Decision 86Gu881 delivered on June 25, 1987

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below determined that the plaintiff transferred the real estate to June 18, 1984 and did not voluntarily pay the marginal profit accruing from the transfer of assets until July 31 of the same year, and that the defendant estimated transfer income tax of KRW 5,812,960 and defense tax of KRW 1,162,590 and notified the plaintiff of the estimated imposition. Accordingly, the plaintiff did not pay the above notified amount of tax imposed on the plaintiff. In making the final return of the capital gains tax as of May 21, 1985, the court below determined that the transfer income tax amount of KRW 30,442 and the defense tax amount of KRW 3,042 were not determined on June 18, 198, and the defendant did not make a final determination of transfer income tax amount of KRW 15,00 as of February 15, 1985, the court below did not make a final determination of transfer income tax amount of KRW 15,042,000,00.

The issue is that when the tax authority has made a final decision identical with the scheduled decision on capital gains tax, the tax amount to be paid by the final decision is nonexistent, and even if the details of the final decision are not notified to the taxpayer, the imposition of capital gains tax pursuant to the contents of the final decision shall be deemed to have been made. However, since Article 128 of the Income Tax Act provides that even in the case of the final decision on income tax, Article 128 of the Income Tax Act provides that the tax base and tax amount and other necessary matters shall be notified to the taxpayer in writing. Article 183(2) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act provides that even in the case of the final decision on income tax, the tax authority shall notify the taxpayer in writing even if there is no tax amount to be paid, even if the contents of the internal final decision on capital gains tax are the same as those of the scheduled decision and there is no tax amount to be paid newly

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and all costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Lee B-soo (Presiding Justice)