2011년 조세법 중요 판례

This article aims to review the contents and meanings of some important tax decisions which were decided in the Supreme Court in 2011. It contains decisions in the realm of Framework Act on National Taxes, Income Tax Act, Corporate Tax Act, Value-Added Tax Act,and Inheritance and Gift Tax Act. Some important decisions are as follows:(1) Supreme Court Ruling 2009du13474 decided on January 20, 2011: this decision ruled that the exporter who knew his or her act of getting a deduction or a refund from the government may cause a loss in the revenue, or did not know the above by a gross negligence, cannot claim a deduction or a refund, as it is against Principle of Good Faith. The decision well meets fairness and justice. (2) Supreme Court Ruling 2009du23617, 23624 decided on March 10, 2011: this decision ruled that decision for a tax examination is a type of administrative disposition that is subject to appeal litigation. The decision allows for a remedy for taxpayer’s rights prior to tax assessment. (3) Supreme Court Ruling 2010du3961 decided on April 28, 2011: this decision ruled that the forward exchange gain in yen-swap deposit is not an income interest. Though the decision leaves room for doubt, considering the principle of substance over form or the parties’ intention in conducting yen-swap deposit, it puts emphasis on strict construction under the principle of no taxation without law, the premise of which is to respect the taxpayers’ choice of form of business. (4) Supreme Court Ruling 2010du23644 decided on July 21, 2011: this decision ruled that capital gain tax should be levied in the case where the seller delivers the registration of a land by a form of gift, which is an expedient, and the buyer uses the land without any obstacle. The decision well meets the concept of capital gain tax, tax justice and fairness. (5) Supreme Court Ruling 2008du150 decided on July 21, 2011: this decision viewed that the related person in the repudiation of unfair acts or calculations clause of the Corporate Income Tax Act should be regarded only in the view of the taxpayer himself or herself(one-side relation theory). The decision is against the legislative history and the purpose of repudiation of unfair acts or calculations clause. (6) Supreme Court Ruling 2008du6813 decided on April 14, 2011: this decision ruled that a specified corporation that has deficits in the Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance and Gift Tax Act 31(1)(i) includes not only a corporation that has forwarded loss, but also one that has a deficit which occurred in the business year of gift. It well meets the legislative wording and purpose of the clause.