The case reversing the judgment of the court below on the ground of incomplete hearing on whether the value-added tax is included in the public sale price under the National Tax Collection

In full view of Article 63(1), Article 42, Article 73, and Article 74 of the Enforcement Rule of the National Tax Collection Act, where a building is sold by a public auction under the National Tax Collection Act, the issue of whether the value-added tax is included in the proceeds of the public auction can be clearly determined by examining the contents of the estimated sale price of the property for the public auction. Therefore, it is not clear whether the value-added tax is included in the proceeds of the public auction without examining the contents of the report.

Articles 63(1), 73, 74 of the National Tax Collection Act, Article 42 of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act

Seoul Trust Bank Co., Ltd., Counsel for defendant-appellee

The director of the North Incheon National Tax Office

Seoul High Court Decision 87Gu323 delivered on February 4, 1988

The judgment below is reversed and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

1. First, we examine the Plaintiff’s ground of appeal.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below acknowledged that the defendant, in order to collect the delinquent national tax from the non-party corporation, sold the land and the above ground buildings located in 316-50, 316, 316, 316, 316-62, 316, 316-62, such as the land and the above ground buildings, in order to collect the delinquent national tax from the non-party corporation, by deducting the amount of value-added tax of the building from the total sale price of KRW 753,00,360 from the total sale price of KRW 753,00,30,360 from the total sale price, and then, from the remainder of the public sale price of the land and the building located in 316-50, 316-50, 316, 316, 316-7, 316, 316, 300, 350, 316, 300, 36,

The judgment of the court below can be summarized to the effect that, in case where a building is sold by a public auction under the National Tax Collection Act, it is not clear whether the value-added tax is included in the supply price of the goods, on the premise that it is not clear whether the value-added tax is included in the sale price of the goods. However, according to Article 63 (1) of the National Tax Collection Act, if the head of a tax office intends to attach the attached property to the public auction, he/she shall determine the estimated sale price, and according to Article 42 of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act, the estimated sale price of the property for the public auction shall be determined in the estimated sale price report of the property for the public auction in attached Form 49, and according to Articles 73 and 74 of the same Act, the estimated sale price of the property for the public auction determined as above becomes the basis for determining the minimum amount for the purchase price of the property for the public auction. Thus, whether the value-added tax

The court below did not examine the contents of the estimated sale price of the property sold to the building of this case and did not clarify whether the value-added tax is included in the sale price of this case. The above determination is erroneous in the misapprehension of law as it did not exhaust all necessary deliberations, which affected the conclusion of the judgment. Therefore, the ground for appeal

2. We examine the Defendant’s ground of appeal.

The court below recognized the fact that the plaintiff acquired the right to collateral security on the ground buildings, etc. 316-50 Won-dong 316-50 Won-dong 316-dong 316, and that the defendant deducted 9,308,360 won of the value-added tax on the building from among the public auction proceeds on the above 316-50 land land and its ground buildings 4259 square meters-dong 316-dong 316, and the 316-6,506,429 and collected the amount of value-added tax on the portion of the above 316-50 ground buildings which the plaintiff became the mortgagee, and held that the defendant's disposition appropriating 9,308,360 won of the value-added tax on the portion of the above 316-50 ground buildings is legitimate within the scope of deducting 6,506,429 won.

However, the court below held that the value-added tax amount of 316-50 of 316-50 of the value-added tax amount of the above 9,308,360 won, which was deducted by the defendant from the public auction price at the time of the original sale, was 6,506,429 won, but the court below held that the defendant issued an appropriate disposition after deducting the value-added tax amount of 9,308,360 won for the 50th 50th 316-50 of the above ground shall be deemed to be unlawful for the reasons inconsistent before and after the order of the court

3. Therefore, the lower judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the lower court. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Song Man-man (Presiding Justice)