A legal person liable for interest income

With respect to interest income, a person who pays the income tax on such income amount shall withhold the income tax on the income earner as income tax on the income earner, and pay it to the Government within the prescribed period, and in withholding the above income tax, a person who is legally liable for tax payment in relation to the State is a withholding agent and is not a person liable for tax payment

Articles 43(1)2 and 49 of the former Income Tax Act (Act No. 1966, Nov. 29, 1967)

Supreme Court Decision 74Da586 Delivered on June 25, 1974

Plaintiff

The head of the Eastern Tax Office's key, scark, Kim Jong-hee, and a condition-type

Daegu High Court Decision 78Gu31 delivered on March 13, 1979

The part of the original judgment dismissing the claim for revocation of each disposition of imposition of KRW 226,600, which was an occasional divided dividend, income tax of KRW 198,00 and occasional divided dividend, and income tax of KRW 226,60 in 1974, shall be reversed, and this part of the case shall be remanded to the Daegu High Court. The plaintiff's remaining appeal shall be dismissed.

The costs of appeal as to the dismissal of the above appeal shall be assessed against the plaintiff.

First of all, the part concerning the imposition of global income tax and defense tax among the first and second grounds for appeal by the plaintiff is examined together.

According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, the court below found the plaintiff's annual interest income amounting to 4,928,900 won in the year 1975 and 1976 and the annual interest income amount was 6,794,400 won in the year 1975, and the plaintiff's annual interest income amount was found to have been evaded without reporting the above income even though he had such income, and accordingly, based on the above facts, the amount of global income tax and defense tax in the year 1975 and 1976 which the plaintiff is payable pursuant to the tax law was assessed against each of the defendant, and thus, the defendant's request for this part of the plaintiff's annual interest income tax in the year 1975 and 1976 under the premise that each disposition is just and unfair, is dismissed, and it is just in light of the records, and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to defense, incomplete reasoning, incomplete deliberation, and any other legal theory as above, and it is justified in the judgment below.

The following grounds of appeal are examined as to the imposition of income tax as Class C dividend in the second ground of appeal.

According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, the court below determined that the disposition of imposition imposed on the plaintiff, other than the withholding agent, is legitimate on the ground that the defendant's annual interest income is an occasional divided dividend income of 198,00 won and income tax of 226,600 won and the annual income tax of 1974, and the annual interest income is not a so-called additional tax as stated in its reasoning.

With respect to the above interest income in the year 1973 and 1974, the person who pays the interest income pursuant to Articles 43(1)2 and 49 of the Income Tax Act at that time (Law No. 1966, Nov. 29, 1967) has the obligation to withhold the income tax on the income amount as income tax on the income earner for the income earner and to pay it to the Government within the prescribed period of time. In the above case of withholding income tax from the State, the person who is legally liable for tax payment in the relation to the State is the withholding agent and the person liable for tax payment (see Supreme Court Decision 74Da586, Jun. 25, 1974). Thus, even if the payer withheld the income tax on the income of each kind of income in the year 1973 and 1974 and did not pay it to the State, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the income tax from the said person liable for tax withholding, and thus, it cannot be justified for the defendant to the above imposition and collection of the income tax.

Therefore, this part of the case among the original judgment is remanded to the Daegu High Court which is the original judgment for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion, and the remaining grounds of appeal by the plaintiff are without merit, and the costs of appeal as to the dismissed part 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 Il-young (Presiding Justice)