Supreme Court Decision 2007Du18284 ( October 25, 2010)

Seoul High Court 2006Nu31640 (Seoul High Court 2007.08.10)

Amount of money paid to members after January 1, 2002 and the amount of money added to the comprehensive welfare benefits will be subject to taxation of interest income tax.

The premium paid to members shall not constitute interest on deposits under Article 16 (1) 3 of the former Income Tax Act, excess refund from workplace mutual-aid association under subparagraph 11, and interest on non-business loans under subparagraph 12, but after the establishment of subparagraph 13 of December 31, 201, it is subject to interest income tax after the establishment of subparagraph 13 of Article 16 of the former Income Tax Act, and it is not contrary to the non-taxable practices and the principle

2010Nu8319 Revocation of revocation of revocation of correction

OO-Mutual Aid Association

O Head of tax office

Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2006Guhap12630 decided Oct. 31, 2006

Seoul High Court Decision 2006Nu31640 Decided August 10, 2007

Supreme Court Decision 2007Du18284 Decided February 25, 2010

December 21, 2010

February 15, 2011

1. The part against the plaintiff falling under any of the following subparagraphs among the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked:

Each part of the defendant's disposition of collecting interest income tax and imposing corporate tax on the plaintiff as stated in the attached Table of Political Party Tax Table, which exceeds the amount corresponding to each party tax column, shall be revoked.

2. The plaintiff's remaining appeal is dismissed.

3. Of the total litigation costs, 95% is borne by the Plaintiff, and the remainder is borne by the Defendant, respectively.

The judgment of the first instance court is revoked. The defendant's revocation of both the disposition of receiving interest income tax and the disposition of imposing corporate tax as stated in the attached Table 1 to the plaintiff (the plaintiff was also excluded from the scope of the judgment of the court of this court, which became final and conclusive by the judgment of the first instance prior to remand, as well as the above claims, regarding the defendant's rejection of correction of the respective interest income tax as of February 4, 2003 and March 4, 2005, and the collection disposition of the interest income tax as of March 200 and 201, and the revocation of the disposition of imposing corporate tax for 200 business years and 201 business years as of May 9, 2005, but this part was also excluded from the scope of the judgment of this court).

1. Basic facts

A. Based on the ○○○○○○ Act, the Plaintiff is a juristic person that carries out various welfare and welfare projects for its members by establishing an efficient mutual aid system for public educational officials, teachers, and staff members of educational institutions, educational administrative agencies, or educational research institutions.

B. On July 25, 1998, the Commissioner of the National Tax Service rendered authoritative interpretation that the Plaintiff’s payment of retirement life benefits constitutes “interest and discount amount of deposits received in Korea” under Article 16(1)3 of the former Income Tax Act (amended by Act No. 8144 of Dec. 30, 2006) on the ground that it is interest of the same nature as deposits of financial institutions, such as banks, etc. among the Plaintiff’s payment system, and the Plaintiff began to withhold interest income tax on the instant payment, retirement life benefits, and general welfare benefits paid to its members from January 1, 1999 (the details of tax withholding are as follows).

C. As a result of the tax investigation conducted on the Plaintiff in early 2005, the Defendant discovered that the Plaintiff omitted the fixed number of the source of the interest income tax on the wood and general welfare benefits paid to its members from January 2000 to December 2003, and collected and notified the interest income tax (as for the interest income tax on the surcharges paid in 202 and 2003, the same shall apply to the statement in the "amount in the annexed Table of the Political Party Tax Table"). On the other hand, on May 9, 2005, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the imposition of corporate tax 349,338,240, corporate tax for 200 business year 146,964,890, corporate tax for 201 business year 146,964,890, corporate tax for 2002, corporate tax for 80,592, corporate tax for 203,204,290, and corporate tax for 2003.

Facts without dispute over the basis of recognition, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 6, 14, 15, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 5, 7 (each omitted of the serial numbers), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the collection and imposition disposition of this case are legitimate

A. Summary of the parties' assertion

(1) Plaintiff

(A) Article 16 (1) 3 of the former Income Tax Act provides that "interest on a deposit shall be subject to interest income tax." Since "deposit" is the same as "deposit" under Article 2 (2) of the Depositor Protection Act, it is recognized only to money raised by "financial institutions" by "members who are not financial institutions and are subject to the payment of charges are limited to former and incumbent public educational officials, and the charges that members pay to the plaintiff are not the plaintiff's obligations but the amount of their capital. In full view of the above, the above charges do not fall under the "deposit" under Article 16 (1) 3 of the former Income Tax Act. Accordingly, the difference in the collection disposition of this case does not fall under the "interest on a deposit" under Article 16 (1) 3 of the former Income Tax Act.

(B) The excess repayment of the Plaintiff Mutual-Aid Association is originally recognized as non-taxation. Considering the circumstances that the excess repayment of the Mutual-Aid Association, etc. on September 27, 1994 before the amendment of the above Act No. 4803, Dec. 22, 1994, the Act and the Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act were amended by Presidential Decree No. 14467, Dec. 31, 1994, and Article 16(1)11 of the Income Tax Act and Article 26(2) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act were newly established, among the excess repayment of the Mutual-Aid Association, only the excess refund due to the worker's retirement or withdrawal was converted into taxation, and even among the excess repayment of the Mutual-Aid Association, the excess repayment of the Mutual-Aid Association was specified as subject to taxation prior to the amendment of the Act No. 4803, Sep. 27, 1994, it constitutes a non-taxation practice, and thus, the Defendant’s imposition of this case violates the principle of trust.

(2) Defendant

(A) The term "deposit" under Article 16 (1) 3 of the former Income Tax Act is a unique concept under the Income Tax Act, and cannot borrow the concept of deposit in the Depositor Protection Act established after the amendment of the Income Tax Act. Even if the term "deposit" under Article 16 (1) 3 of the Income Tax Act is recognized only when the "financial institution" bears obligations from many and unspecified persons, the issue of "deposit" under the principle of substantial taxation shall be determined based on the form and substance, not only in the form but also in the substance.

(B) Even if the instant surcharge does not correspond to the “interest on a deposit” under Article 16(1)3 of the Income Tax Act, it constitutes an object of taxation on interest income under Article 16(1)12 or 13 of the same Act, and thus, the collection and disposition of this case are lawful.

(b) Related statutes;

It is as shown in the attached Table related statutes.

(c) Fact of recognition;

(1) The provisions of the Plaintiff’s articles of incorporation regarding membership eligibility, qualification, etc. are as follows.

[Articles of Incorporation]

Article 4 (Members) The members of the Mutual-Aid Association shall consist of general members and special members.

Article 4-2 (Qualifications for Admission)

(1) A person who is eligible to join a general member of the Mutual-Aid Association shall be a person falling under any of the following subparagraphs: Provided, That persons employed temporarily or on a condition shall be excluded:

1. Teachers, superintendents of education, superintendent of education, superintendent of education, school inspectors, educational researchers, and educational researchers under each subparagraph of Article 2 (1) of the Public Educational Officials Act;

2. State public officials or local public officials, other than public educational officials working for educational institutions, educational administrative agencies, or educational research institutions under Article 2 (2) through (4) of the Public Educational Officials Act

3. Teachers and staff of private schools under Article 2 (1) of the Private School Act; and

4. Officers and employees of the Mutual-Aid Association;

5. Executives and employees of hospitals established under the Act on the Establishment of National University-affiliated Hospitals and the Establishment of Seoul Dental Hospital (Authorization of February 18, 2004);

(2) Persons who may join a special member of the Mutual-Aid Association shall be as follows:

1. General members, who are retirement age or honorary retirement, and who retire at the expiration of the term of office;

2. A person who has retired at least 60 years of age as an ordinary member;

3. Persons who retire from active service as prescribed in Article 44;

4. A person who has served not less than 10 years as a regular member and who reaches not less than 55 years of age (authorization on July 13, 195);

Article 5 (Acquisition of Qualifications) Members shall be qualified on the date on which the Mutual-Aid Association has paid the prescribed contributions in accordance with the procedures for admission.

Article 6 (Rights and Duties) Members shall have the duty to bear the prescribed contributions and the right to receive the benefits and other benefits or services from the Mutual-Aid Association.

(2) The provisions of the Plaintiff’s articles of incorporation concerning the Plaintiff’s capital, charges, and salaries are as follows.

[Articles of Incorporation]

Article 29 (Capital) The capital of the Mutual-Aid Association shall be members' contributions, government subsidies and net profits generated from business.

Article 30 (Loss of Business) Loss of Business by Members' Charges shall be transferred to the Government subsidies.

Article 33 (Amount of Charges)

(1) The amount of members' contributions shall be the number of shares, and long-term savings benefits of ordinary members shall be 600 won per unit (authorization on August 22, 2005).

② The amount of school children’s benefits, wood, comprehensive welfare benefits, and retirement benefits shall be separately determined (the approval on July 13, 1995, and the approval on August 22, 2005).

Article 35 (Kinds of Assistances)

(1) Benefits for general members shall be as follows:

1. Long-term savings benefits (authorization on August 22, 2005);

2. The salaries of students;

3. Badon benefits (authorization on August 22, 2005);

4. General welfare benefits (authorization on July 13, 1995).

(2) Long-term savings benefits referred to in subparagraph 1 of paragraph (1) shall be classified into three types: retirement benefits, sickness benefits, and survivor's benefits (authorization on August 22, 2005).

(3) The salaries to special members shall be the retirement living allowances and the comprehensive welfare allowances (the approval of July 13, 1995, August 22, 2005).

Article 36 (Schools' Benefits, Education Benefits, Comprehensive Welfare Benefits, and Retirement Benefits)

① Matters concerning school children’s benefits, wood payments, comprehensive welfare benefits, and retirement benefits shall be separately determined (the approval on July 13, 1995, and the approval on August 22, 2005).

(2) A person who intends to subscribe to the faculty’s benefits and timber benefits shall be a regular member (authorization on August 22, 2005).

(3) Any person who intends to subscribe to a comprehensive welfare benefit shall be eligible to subscribe to a general member or a special member as referred to in Article 4-2 (1) and (2) (the approval of July 13, 1995).

(4) When a person who has subscribed to a comprehensive welfare benefit under Article 35 (1) 4 dies or loses eligibility for joining due to other reasons, the recipient may succeed to the relevant contract and maintain its effect (authorization on August 22, 2005).

(3) The kinds of benefits handled by the Plaintiff are as follows.

- Long-term savings benefits (retirement benefits, sickness benefits, bereaved family benefits)

1. Amount of subscription (charges): Amount of 600 won per unit and amount of 500 - maximum account per unit and payment per month;

2. Additional dues: Payment in accordance with the "retirement benefit rate" for the payment period of the charges (which may be adjusted when the difference between the average interest rate on time deposits with one-year maturity in a commercial bank and the retirement benefit rate is 10% or more of the relevant rate);

(c) Payment of benefits: at the time of occurrence of reasons for retirement or withdrawal;

/ Pension benefits (previous pension benefits)

(iv)ret savings instruments for incumbent teachers and staff and accumulation-type goods in receipt of money at the maturity of each month after payment at a fixed time every month during their subscription period (3 years, 5 years), which operate the membership’s money at a higher rate upon entrustment;

5) Persons subject to insurance, etc.: General members (Articles of Incorporation Article 36(2) and Article 4 of the Rules on Money Benefits).

(vi) the amount of accession (charges).

-for Class 1, 2, and 3 benefits, lump sum payment shall be one million won per unit of a Gu, up to one hundred - one hundred - one hundred - one hundred - one hundred - one hundred -

- Class 4 benefits may be admitted not less than 10,00 won per month to the maximum of 100,000 won (Article 6(1) of the Badon Benefits

4) Insurance coverage period: From the date on which an application for subscription is received to the expiration date of the benefits payment date: Provided, That Class 4 benefits shall be three years and five years (Article 6(2) of the Badon Benefits Rules)

5) Type of benefit (Articles 10 to 13 of the wooden Money Benefit Code)

- Class 1 benefit: Principal and interest on every three months, six months, and one year, and payment in installments, for each period of insurance coverage (one year to ten years);

- Class 2 benefits: A surcharge shall be paid every three months, six months, and one year, and the principal shall be paid at the time when the benefit is claimed;

- Class 3 benefits: Payment of principal upon request;

- Class 4 benefits: Payment of principal and additional amounts when a certain amount of charges is payable every month after maturity during an agreed period;

6) Additional money (Article 18 of the wooden Savings Rules): It shall be calculated by applying an additional rate of not less than the average interest rate of one-year term deposits in five commercial banks plus not less than 0.5 percent, however, the basic interest rate on time deposits shall be adjusted on the basis of the interest rate on the first day of each month.

/Retirement life benefits (previous life benefits)

1) A senior life security system for retired teachers and staff who operate various pensions, retirement benefits, etc. received at the time of retirement of a member at an entrusted rate;

2. Persons subject to insurance, etc.: Members who subscribed to long-term savings benefits, and retire at the age of 60 or more, such as retirement age, honorary, expiration of the term of office, sick soldiers, and long-term savings benefits, and teachers and staff members who retire at the age of 55 after entering the

3) Subscription amount (charges) (Article 6 of the Retirement Benefit Code): Additional dues, accumulation type (three years, five years), life-long pension type, and fixed pension type; subscription amount may be subscribed to up to 60 old unit (300 million won) with the amount of additional dues, life-long pension type, and fixed pension type at least five million won per unit (5 million won per unit), and accumulation amount shall be 10,000 won per month with the maximum amount of 10,000 won per month.

(iv) kind of benefits (Articles 8 through 11 of the retirement living allowance rules);

- Additional penalty: The additional penalty shall be paid monthly or annually until the principal is claimed, and the principal shall be paid at the request.

- Accumulation type: Payment of principal and surcharges at once on maturity;

- Life annuity type: A payment of principal and added money in installments each month or year;

- A fixed pension type: A installment payment for each month or year during the insurance coverage period (the principal and additional amount extinguished upon the expiration of the insurance coverage period);

5) Additional dues (Article 122 of the Retirement Benefit Code): Additional rates shall be calculated by applying the addition rates in excess of the average interest rate of one-year term deposits in five commercial banks plus 0.5% on the average of the basic interest rates of one-year term deposits in five commercial banks depending on the type of benefits, and the basic interest rate for term deposits shall be adjusted based on the interest rate on the 1st

4. General welfare benefits (saving benefits)

1) Persons subject to insurance, etc.: General members and special members (Articles of incorporation low 136(3));

(b) Type of subscription: Guarantee benefits, savings benefits [the eligibility for guarantee benefits (Article 23 of the General Welfare Benefits Rules), and the suspension of subscription from January 1, 2004 for savings benefits];

3. Amount of subscription: 10,000 won per share of monthly payment, semi-annual payment, annual payment, and lump-sum payment, which may be admitted up to 30,000 won per share (30 million won).

(d) Insurance coverage period: 3 years, 5 years.

5) Additional dues: the same shall apply to the surcharge for a wooden money.

6) Payment of benefits: Payment upon termination and cancellation of a contract.

Facts without dispute over the basis of recognition, and each entry in Gap evidence 1 through 5, 18 through 22

D. Determination

(1) Interpretation of law

Article 16 (1) of the former Income Tax Act (amended by Act No. 6557 of Dec. 31, 2001; hereinafter the same) provides that "interest income shall be the income falling under any of the following subparagraphs generated during the pertinent year", and subparagraph 3 provides that "interest and discount amount of deposits (including installment savings, installments, deposits, and postal transfer) received in the Republic of Korea" and "excess refund of workplace mutual-aid association as prescribed by the Presidential Decree" under subparagraph 11 and paragraph (3) of the same Article provides that "matters necessary for the scope of interest income under the provisions of each subparagraph of paragraph (1) shall be prescribed by the Presidential Decree", but Article 16 (1) of the Income Tax Act (amended by Act No. 8144 of Dec. 30, 2006) (hereinafter referred to as "the above provision") provides that "the above provision is newly established and added from the income subject to the income tax of Article 13 of the Income Tax Act, which is paid by a worker before and after his retirement pursuant to subparagraph 12 subparagraph 12 of the above amendment.

In full view of the language, legislative purport and amendment process of each of the above provisions, and the purport of each of the provisions of this case, especially the newly establishing subparagraph 13 of this case, is to supplement the disadvantages of the conventional listing method concerning income subject to taxation by including it in the subject of taxation of interest income, and realize the principle of fair taxation by comprehensively examining the following: (a) even if income not included in the scope of interest income listed in subparagraphs 1 through 12 is not included in the scope of the subject of taxation pursuant to subparagraphs 1 through 12, if there is a nature of consideration following the use of money, it is reasonable to interpret that the interest income tax may be levied pursuant to subparagraph 13 if it is similar to that of the income listed in subparagraphs 1 through 12 after January 1, 202, in which the provision of this case was enforced,

(2) Whether additional dues are subject to interest income tax

(A) Whether Article 16 (1) 3 of the former Income Tax Act is applicable

According to the Plaintiff’s articles of incorporation, the Plaintiff’s capital consists of installment payments deposited by its members, such as former and incumbent public educational officials, and net profits from government subsidies and businesses. The Plaintiff’s payment to its members includes long-term savings benefits, donation payments, retirement living allowances, and comprehensive welfare benefits. The Plaintiff’s payment of long-term savings benefits is paid at the time of member’s retirement or withdrawal, by adding an additional amount calculated by the addition rate reflecting the average interest rate of one-year term deposits at the maturity of a commercial bank, with regard to the members’ contributions at the time of member’s retirement or withdrawal. The Plaintiff’s payment is made at the agreed time before member’s retirement or withdrawal, and the amount calculated by adding an additional amount calculated by adding an additional rate exceeding 0.5% to the average interest rate of one-year term deposits at the maturity of five commercial banks.

According to this, the amount paid by the Plaintiff to its members as an additional payment of the wood payment and the general welfare benefit is not the Plaintiff's liabilities but the Plaintiff's shares in the capital. However, it is difficult to view the Plaintiff's shares as the special corporation established under the former Teachers' Mutual Aid Association Act because it is not a financial institution under the Depositor Protection Act. Thus, the amount of the surcharge in this case does not constitute a "interest on deposits" under Article 16 (1) 3 of the former Income Tax Act or subparagraph 3 of the same Article (the time of payment does not fall under the "excess refund of the mutual aid association" under subparagraph 11 of the same Article as the retirement or withdrawal transfer of its members).

(B) Whether Article 16 (1) 12 of the former Income Tax Act is applicable

The term "profit from a non-business loan" under Article 16 (1) 12 of the former Income Tax Act refers to the interest or fee that a person who does not engage in a business of lending money receives as a result of a temporary contingent loan. Therefore, in order to be subject to the above provision, a loan contract (including quasi-consumption loan contract and a contract for consumption deposit) is required. The Plaintiff's member's charge paid is in accordance with Article 7 (2) of the Korean Teachers' Mutual Aid Association Act and Article 6 of the Articles of Incorporation, so it cannot be viewed as a loan contract, etc. for consumption corresponding to "loan of money." Therefore, the added amount does not correspond to "profit from a non-business loan" under Article 16 (1) 12 of the former Income Tax Act.

(C) Whether it falls under subparagraph 13 of the instant provision

In light of the above legal principles, the following circumstances are revealed as follows, i.e., ① the Plaintiff paid the amount calculated by a certain rate of addition according to the prior agreement regardless of its operation performance as a substitute for the Plaintiff’s deposit of charges, and the additional rate was higher than the deposit interest rate; ② even if the Plaintiff’s capital was formed, it was returned even before the Plaintiff withdraws from the membership; ③ the operation method of the Plaintiff’s deposit with the Plaintiff’s deposit with other members of the Plaintiff’s number of 0,000 won, or paying the additional amount with the proceeds derived from lending it to or investing in various financial products and real estate, etc., by the bank or other financial institutions. Accordingly, the instant additional amount can be deemed equal to the interest income under subparagraph 3 of the provision of this case as consideration for the use of money, and thus, it can be deemed equal to the interest income under subparagraph 13 of the provision of this case.

(D) Sub-committee

Of the instant collection disposition and disposition, the portion of the surcharge to which No. 13 of the instant provision applies is lawful, and the portion not so, is unlawful.

(3) The scope of surcharges to which subparagraph 13 of the instant provision applies

(A) Article 3 of the Addenda of the Income Tax Act amended by Act No. 6557, Dec. 31, 2001, which newly enacted subparagraph 13 of the instant provision, was enforced from January 1, 2002, provides that "this Act shall apply to the portion of the first income accrued after the enforcement of this Act". Accordingly, among the instant surcharge, the interest income tax may be imposed by applying subparagraph 13 of the instant provision only on the surcharge accrued after January 1, 2002, and the surcharge accrued before December 31, 2001 cannot be imposed on the surcharge.

However, the issue of whether an additional amount of income is subject to taxation is not the time when income subject to taxation is realized, such as the time when the additional amount of income is actually paid, but the time when the Plaintiff’s right to the additional amount of income subject to taxation arises to the Plaintiff’s members according to the principle of confirmation of right. Thus, in order to determine that the right to the additional amount of income subject to taxation has been created, it shall be reasonable to determine whether the right is mature and definite, and whether the right to the additional amount of income has become mature and definite should not be uniformly determined, and it shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account the nature, content, and legal and factual aspects of each individual right (see Supreme Court Decision 2001Du7176, Dec. 26, 2003).

According to the facts without dispute between the parties and the purport of the whole oral argument, it can be acknowledged that the fact that the general welfare benefit is provided that when the maturity comes or the termination is made pursuant to the general welfare benefit-related rules (Enforcement Rule Article 69 of the Enforcement Rule), the total amount of additional dues, etc. shall be paid. As such, in the case of the general welfare benefit which comes or the termination is made before December 31, 2001, the income from additional dues can be said to have already occurred. Accordingly, the interest income tax shall not be imposed by applying subparagraph 13 of the Enforcement Rule of this case.

According to the facts without dispute between the parties, Gap evidence Nos. 38-1 through 157, and Gap evidence No. 41, the amount of interest income tax on the remainder of the additional dues other than the additional dues with maturity maturity or termination on or before December 31, 2001, as mentioned above, is the same as the amount entered in the "political tax amount" among the "disposition for Fixed-Term Amount of Interest Income Tax" in the attached Table, and the above "political tax amount" can be recognized as the same fact as the amount entered in the "assessment for corporate tax" in the "disposition for Corporate Tax of 2002 and 203" calculated again according to the stated amount of interest income tax. Thus, the portion corresponding to the stated amount in the "political tax amount" in the disposition for collection and disposition of this case is lawful since it is against the additional amount to which subparagraph 13 of the same Article applies, but it is unlawful as it does not exceed the above portion.

(B) The Plaintiff asserts that, although the Income Tax Act was amended on December 31, 2001, subparagraph 13 of the instant provision was newly established, there was no provision on the receipt date of the interest income, and only the Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act was amended on December 30, 2003 and enforced on January 1, 2004. Thus, the Plaintiff asserted that, with respect to the instant surcharge accrued prior to December 30, 203, there was no provision on the receipt date of the interest income, the interest income tax on the entire amount cannot be imposed because there was no provision on the receipt date of the interest income.

The Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act was amended by Presidential Decree No. 18173 on December 30, 2003, and Article 45 subparagraph 1 of the same Act provides that interest income under subparagraph 13 of the same Article shall be repaid on the basis of the agreement: Provided, That when repayment is made prior to the deadline, the repayment date was stipulated as the receipt date, but there was no explicit provision as to it prior to the amendment. However, in full view of the purport of the new provision No. 13 of this case and the contents of the Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act prior to the amendment, the receipt date of interest income under subparagraph 13 of the same Article shall be repaid under the agreement: Provided, That if repayment is made prior to the deadline, the repayment date shall be interpreted as the "payment date", and therefore, the interest income tax may be imposed on the additional payment accrued prior to the amendment of the Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act. Therefore, the plaintiff's above assertion is without merit.

(4) Whether it violates non-taxable practices and the principle of good faith

(A) Whether a non-taxable practice is established

In order to establish a non-taxation practice under Article 18(3) of the former Framework Act on National Taxes (amended by Act No. 9911, Jan. 1, 2010) with respect to the tax and law acts of the tax authorities, there is an objective fact that the tax authority has not imposed any tax on certain matters over a long-term period, and there is an intention that the tax authority would not impose any tax on any specific matter with the knowledge that it is able to impose tax on such matters, and such intent will be externally and implicitly expressed. In addition, the term "the interpretation of the tax-related law or the practice of national tax administration accepted by the general taxpayer" refers to the extent that the erroneous interpretation or practice is accepted by the general taxpayer who is not a specific taxpayer, and it is not unreasonable for the taxpayer to trust such interpretation or practice without any objection. The mere fact that there was an expression of public opinion on the criteria for interpreting the tax-related law cannot be viewed as such interpretation or practice only on the basis of the fact that there was a public opinion on such interpretation or practice. The burden of proof for such interpretation or practice is asserted on the taxpayer (see, 2003.

Even if the Defendant did not take active taxation measures with respect to the Plaintiff’s surcharge by 1998, the evidence alone submitted by the Plaintiff is insufficient to deem that the Defendant expressed it externally or explicitly with the intent not to impose tax on the surcharge, or that such non-taxation interpretation or practice was justified on a general taxpayer, which was accepted without any objection, to the extent that the taxpayer’s trust in such interpretation or practice is not unreasonable, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s assertion that the non-taxation practice with respect to the surcharge of this case has been established is without merit.

(B) Whether the principle of good faith is violated

In general, in order to apply the principle of trust and good faith to the acts of tax authorities in tax legal relations, first, the tax authorities must express the public opinion that is the object of trust to taxpayers, second, the taxpayer should not be responsible for the taxpayer's reliance on the taxing authority's reliance on the taxing authority's reliance on the taxing authority's reliance on the taxing authority's reliance on the taxing authority's reliance on the taxing authority's reliance on the taxing authority's reliance on the taxing authority's reliance on the taxing authority's reliance on the taxing authority's reliance on the taxing authority's reliance on the taxing authority's reliance on the taxing authority's reliance on the taxing authority's reliance on the taxing authority's reliance

According to the statement in Gap evidence No. 13, the Ministry of Finance and Economy may, on September 27, 1994, defer the imposition of tax on excess repayment of a workplace mutual-aid association for three years from the "amended Matters of the State Council" on Sep. 27, 1994, and recognize the fact that it decided to impose tax on the excess repayment of a workplace mutual-aid association from the insured on and after January 1, 1999. However, such circumstance alone is difficult to deem that the defendant expressed a public opinion that it is exempt from the surcharge of this case, and the other evidence submitted by the plaintiff alone is insufficient to deem that there was a public opinion expressed by the defendant. Therefore, without considering the remaining requirements, the plaintiff's assertion that the collection and imposition of

(5) Centrality

Since the part of the collection disposition and disposition of this case exceeds the amount stated in the separate sheet of tax amount of each party, the plaintiff's claim of this case seeking the revocation of the above dispositions is justified within this scope, and there is no reason for the remaining claims.

3. Conclusion

The judgment of the court of first instance is unfair since it differs from this conclusion, and the plaintiff's appeal is justified within the above scope of recognition. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.