부가가치세법의 주요 쟁점에 관한 판례의 조명과 동향

This article aims to review the contents and meanings of some important tax decisions which were decided in the Supreme Court on the Value-added Tax Act of Korea. Some important Value-added Tax decisions are as follows： Firstly, Rendered on November 22, 2002, 2002Da38828：“Value-added Tax Act"(before revision on June 7th, 2013) Article 15 of the Regulation on Collection over Transactions show that Value-added Tax is shifted from the end consumer to the responsibility of those who supply of goods and services. Therefore, the entrepreneurs have no right under the law stated above to collect VAT directly from the consumers. The court rule affirms the previously mentioned stance. Secondly, Rendered on November 18, 2004, 2002Du5771：the Supreme Court's rule from the old VAT　Act Article 17, paragraph (2) mentions denial in the deduction of input tax amount in the case where the “date of tax invoice is untruthful." Here, this clause is interpreted as the case where the actual date of tax invoice is written differently from the actual business trade. It has been made clear that regardless of the written date of tax invoice, if the taxation period of actual date of provision of goods and services matches the taxation period of actual date of tax invoice, the deduction of input tax amount is valid. Thirdly, Rendered on December 21, 1995, 94Nu1449：the Supreme Court's rule from the old VAT Act Article 17, paragraph (2) clarifies that the denial of input tax deduction is limited. It was ruled that the land-related input tax which increases the value of the land should be non-reductible. This ruling is in line with the basic principle of VAT in that the 'capital expenditure' related input tax for the composition of tax is non-reductible whether it is tax-exempt business or taxable business. Fourth, Rendered on October 27, 2006, 2004Du13288：examining the contents and the intent of old VAT Act, the calculated division of common input tax amount for the shareholder of profit corporation is ruled as applicable when an entrepreneur run both tax-exempt business and taxable business. Fifth, Rendered on March 21, 2013, 2011Da95564：in a case for return tax request of value added taxes, the Supreme Court has rendered a judgment to recognize that the case is for a party suit as an administrative suit, changing the preexisting position of recognizing the legal relations for private laws and handling the case as a civil suit. For a long time, where there is a tax to be returned as the paid taxes should be returned under the premise that the disposition of tax imposition is invalid as a matter of course or the requirements for return as set forth in individual tax laws have been satisfied, with respect to the case for request of return of mistakenly excessive tax payments, most academic theories have argued that cases like this case are recognized as the legal relations for public laws and are subject to a civil suit and the criteria for differentiating the two suits, and then also analyzed individual cases of different types involving the issue of whether the case is for a party suit or for a civil suit. Lastly, the current issues on value-added tax are reviewed to examine the future challenges.