국가회계기준에 관한 규칙에 따른 기술료 회계처리 사례연구: 수익인식을 중심으로

This paper analyzes an accounting treatment for royalty given by the government to those organizations whose budgetary needs for research and development(thereafter 'R&D') are provided by government contribution. In particular, this paper analyzes in detail issues of revenue recognition timing and focuses on each central administrative departments responsible for accounting treatment, consignment institution, responsible for collecting royalty and licensee, responsible for management and supervision of research and development activities. Korean National Accounting Standards are applied for accounting treatment for royalty. There were in-depth discussions about treatment for royalty, because importance and unity of that were showed up by each central government, after incorporating into comprehensiveness of budget of royalty, in 2014. This case examines present condition for treatment for royalty of each central government and consignment institution for collecting royalty which recognize revenue. By doing so, this study suggests academical and institutional grounds for royalty such as Korean National Accounting Standards and practical issues in accounting application. In particular, the study seeks to understand the current collection structure of royalty that each central governments consign collection for royalty to consignment institution for collecting royalty and aims for a systematic interpretation about application between institution for royalty and accounting standards. The summary of this case is as follows. With respect to royalty, the receipt in return for results about national R&D program, central government A and consignment institution B recognized the revenue for royalty amounting to 20 billion won(hypothetical amount) in 2014 when they received that. However, The Board of Audit and Inspection of Korea(thereafter 'BAI') which is responsible for central government audit, insisted that the revenue for royalty should be recorded when central government A and consignment institution B entered into royalty contract with R&D institution amounting to 140 billion won(hypothetical amount) other than receipt timing. The BAI has the view that criteria for revenue recognition is satisfied when conclusion of contract as for fixed amount royalty, as at this time the earning process is completed by providing government contribution and government A and consignment institution B can reasonably measure the amount for royalty. But government A and consignment institution B argue that the earning process is not completed at contract point but continue throughout agreement of period. In addition, government A and consignment institution B insist that they cannot reasonably measure the amount for royalty because R&D institution has the control about royalty amount and payment timing taking advantage of revenue institution such as reduction, exemption and extension of royalty. Therefore, government A and consignment institution B insist that cash-based revenue recognition method is more appropriate than accrual-based revenue recognition method. This case study review relevant accounting standards such as Korean National Accounting Standards and Korean International Financial Reporting Standards and attempt to apply systematic interpretation about treatment for royalty. Our study makes several contributions to the extant literature. First, under present circumstances lacking systematic prior research, this case provides the opportunity to understand specificity of revenue recognition procedures of nation by analyzing revenue recognition case for royalty under Korean National Accounting Standards. Second, unlike former studies which mainly introduce manipulating technique for revenue, this case make us understand practical issues with regard to implementation of accounting standards itself, by elaborating on difference in interpretation about accounting standards among the interested parties. Third, throughout the discussion about appropriateness of treatment for royalty, researchers and information users could widely understand institutional system for royalty which is unfamiliar for them. Furthermore, this case provides implication to re-check various consideration(for example, the object and constraint condition for accounting) required for revenue recognition with those responsible for accounting treatment in practice and accounting standard legislator by explaining in detail about present accounting standards and application process of that.