[1] The meaning of "justifiable cause" under Article 10 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act and the burden of proof (=public prosecutor)

[2] Time to determine whether there is a justifiable reason under Article 10 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act, and whether there is no justifiable reason in all three times of arrears (affirmative)

[3] The case holding that there is a justifiable reason for delinquency in the payment of taxes since it cannot be deemed that the defendant had property to pay taxes at the time of the payment deadline

[1] Article 10 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act/ [2] Article 10 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act/ [3] Article 10 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders

[1] Supreme Court Decision 2000Do2858 decided Oct. 27, 2000 (Gong2000Ha, 2481) Supreme Court Decision 2006Do524 decided Mar. 23, 2006

Defendant

Defendant

Busan District Court Decision 2006No954 Decided July 26, 2006

The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Busan District Court Panel Division.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

1. Summary of the facts charged

The Defendant is a person who engages in the construction equipment leasing business under the trade name of “(trade name omitted)”. On March 31, 2004, value-added tax of 3,53,550, value-added tax of 3,143,200, value-added tax of 3,169,870, which is the due date for payment on April 25, 2004, and value-added tax of 3,169,870, which is the due date for payment on September 30, 2004, did not pay taxes more than three times in one fiscal year without good cause.

2. The judgment of the court below

The court below found the defendant guilty on the ground that the defendant lent equipment to the target comprehensive construction site around June 2003, received all of the face value of 22.8 million won from the issuance of Thai Construction Co., Ltd. in the name of the price, and he leased equipment to the (on-site name omitted) site on January 31, 2005 and received all of 48 million won from the date of payment, and in light of this, the defendant did not have sufficient means to pay the above delinquent tax.

3. Judgment on the grounds of appeal

The term "justifiable cause" under Article 10 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act includes not only causes for taxpayers unable to pay taxes in mind, such as natural disasters, fire, war, or other disaster, or theft, but also causes for taxpayers having difficulty in paying taxes due to their economic circumstances, such as illness of taxpayers or their family members living together, declaration of bankruptcy, and commencement of auction of taxpayers' property. Furthermore, in determining whether a justifiable reason exists, the determination of whether a justifiable reason exists shall be made on an individual basis by taking into account the circumstances of the delinquency, arrears, and period, etc. in full consideration of the legislative intent of the punishment. The prosecutor bears the burden of proving that there is no justifiable reason (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 200Do2858, Oct. 27, 200). In addition, the existence of a justifiable reason shall be determined by the time when taxes are in arrears, that is, the time when the crime of violating Article 10 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act is established, and by the time limit for payment of taxes three times in arrears.

According to the records, the defendant consistently asserts that the above amount of taxes in arrears was not paid inevitably due to the reason that most of the mid-term rental fees were received as a bill while operating the "(trade name omitted)" and the payment was not made until the maturity, and that some of the bills received as rental fees did not receive the above amount of taxes due to the reason that he did not receive the above amount of taxes during the mid-term rental fees, and some of the transaction partners did not pay the above amount of taxes. The first instance court employment evidence cited by the court below does not have any evidence to acknowledge that the defendant had any property to pay the above amount of taxes at the time of the payment deadline of each tax, and it is insufficient to recognize that the defendant did not have any justifiable reason for delinquency in payment at the time of the above amount of taxes. All of the circumstances cited by the court below are merely the fact that the defendant received the above amount of taxes in arrears after the expiration of the payment deadline of each tax (name omitted at the former or on-site rental fees after the prosecution of this case).

Therefore, the court below's determination that the defendant did not have justifiable grounds for default on each of the above taxes due to the circumstances after the deadline for payment of the above taxes was erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to Article 10 of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act or in failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, which affected the conclusion of the judgment. Thus, the ground of appeal pointing this out

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the court below for a new trial and determination. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Shin Hyun-chul (Presiding Justice)