logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 1985. 5. 28. 선고 85누8 판결
[부가가치세부과처분취소][공1985.7.15.(756),947]
Main Issues

A taxpayer who has a separate source of income, etc. subject to taxation;

Summary of Judgment

If the title of the income, profit, property, act or transaction subject to taxation is merely nominal, and there is another person to whom it actually belongs, the person to whom it actually belongs shall be the person to whom it actually belongs, regardless of its name lending act itself is subject to taxation.

[Reference Provisions]

Article 14 of the Framework Act on National Taxes

Reference Cases

Supreme Court Decision 82Nu319 Decided July 12, 1983

Plaintiff-Appellee

[Judgment of the court below]

Defendant-Appellant

The director of the tax office

original decision

Seoul High Court Decision 84Gu271 delivered on December 13, 1984

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

Reasons

We examine the grounds of appeal.

In light of the records, if the court below collected the evidence based on the fact-finding data, it can be recognized that the plaintiff, from November 1, 1978, registered the business with the trade name of ○○ commercial company, and operated the chemical drug wholesaler in the chemical medicine market, at the request of the non-party on January 1, 1980, lent the business registration name to him and caused him to import and sell the amount of gold-free tamping from Hong Kong in the name of ○○ commercial company. Therefore, in the same purport, the court below's decision that the disposition imposing the value-added tax of this case against the plaintiff, who is only the nominal owner, is unlawful since the plaintiff is merely the nominal owner, and it is clear that the actual owner is the non-party. Thus, the court below's decision that the disposition imposing the value-added tax of this case against

Meanwhile, in a case where the ownership of the income, profit, property, act, or transaction subject to taxation is merely nominal, and there is another person to whom such income, profit, property, act, or transaction belongs, the so-called principle of substantial taxation that the person to whom such income, etc. actually belongs is declared as a taxpayer, and thus, the so-called principle of substantial taxation that the person to whom such income, etc. belongs cannot be exempted from ultimate liability for the transaction that is the cause of taxation as the nominal lender, aside from the fact that the act

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

Justices Park Jong-soo (Presiding Justice)

arrow
심급 사건
-서울고등법원 1984.12.13.선고 84구271
본문참조조문