회수불능과 후발적 경정청구[대상판결 : 대법원 2014. 1. 29. 선고 2013두18810 판결]

The Supreme Court case of 2013Du18810 confirms clearly that the reasons for being uncollectible fall under the later reasons for reassessment provided in the Item 2, Article 25-2 of the Presidential Decree of the Framework Act on National Taxes otherwise the specific provision in the Income Tax Act for the bad debts related to the business income is applied. Previously the reasons for being uncollectible have been argued in most suit cases against tax assessment as a matter whether such reasons was objectively obvious or not at the time when tax liability is completed. Thus, it has functioned as a legal principle in determining the completion of tax liability. However, there has not been clearly demonstrated the theoretical significance of the legal principle on the reasons for being uncollectible, and thus some have attempted to articulate it in view of ① the extended idea for the settlement principle of claims and obligations and ② a kind of reason for extinction of taxing right. The case which is discussed in this study is significant in that it makes relatively accurate decisions on the relationship between the settlement principle of claims and obligations and the claim of reassessment by later reason, as it confirms clearly that the reasons for being uncollectible fall under the later reasons for reassessment in view of ② mentioned above and makes an additional remark that the settlement principle of claims and obligations for the purpose of the Income Tax Act is the concept of tool in the context of technique in tax collection.