logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2014.09.04 2014구합3495
부가가치세부과처분취소
Text

1. The Defendant on November 10, 2012:

A. The value-added tax for the second term of 207 against Plaintiff A and D was 13,862,760 won, and the first term portion of 2008.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. Seoul Jung-gu E, F, G, and H have a commercial building on the second floor (hereinafter “instant commercial building”). The instant commercial building E is jointly owned by Plaintiff A, D, and F, Plaintiff C, D, and H are jointly owned by Plaintiff C, D, and C, D, and C, respectively, and each of the buildings is registered as business.

B. As a result of conducting a tax investigation of value-added tax on the instant commercial building from September 10, 2012 to September 29, 2012, the Defendant: (a) confirmed that, around December 2006, the Plaintiffs: (b) leased the instant commercial building from January 10, 2007 to January 9, 2009, the deposit amount of KRW 379,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 11,350,000; and (c) reported the amount of revenue of the instant commercial building from February 2, 2007 to September 29, 2008; and (d) issued the disposition of imposition of value-added tax (the disposition of imposition of value-added tax; hereinafter “the disposition of imposition of value-added tax”).

[ table] The amount of tax calculated on November 10, 2012.10, 13, 862, 760, 7608, Nov. 10, 2012.10, 2013, 538, 570, 570 on February 2, 2012.10, 11, 179, 370 F (K) C B B, 2007, Nov. 10, 2014, 95, 995, 730, 208, Nov. 14, 2012; 10, 640, 308, 204; 130, 140, 040, 040, 2040, 208, 2008, 305, 308, 194, 208, 2019)

C. The Plaintiffs were dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an objection against the Defendant on February 4, 2013, but the Defendant dismissed it on March 18, 2013. The Plaintiffs filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal on June 5, 2013, but the Tax Tribunal dismissed it on November 21, 2013. The Plaintiffs appealed appealed and filed the instant lawsuit on February 13, 2014.

[Grounds for Recognition: Facts without any gaps, Gap evidence 1, 2, 18, 19, Eul evidence 1 through 4, the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiffs asserted that they entered into a lease contract with the tenant of the commercial building of this case around December 2006.

arrow