신탁재산과 부가가치세의 납세의무자 -조합재산과의 비교를 중심으로-

This article introduces all the facts of the two cases on partnership property and trust property, and reasons that the supreme court’s position on the person liable to pay taxes for the Value-Added Tax Act is based on the entity theory. In Korea, the transaction of supplying goods is accounted as the taxable object in Value-Added Taxation. Therefore, in accordance to the Value-Added Tax Act, the person liable to taxes is the entrepreneur supplying the goods. According to the first supreme court case, in circumstances of a partnership other than juristic person, the entrepreneur supplying the goods is considered as the partnership. This is because the partnership already is a unified organization or entity with its own objective. Hence, the supreme court acknowledges the entity of a partnership other than juristic person as the subject of rights and duties. According to the second supreme court case, when it comes to trusts, the entrepreneur is the trustee who supplies the goods in the process of performing trust affairs. This is because the trustee as the subject to whom the rights and duties concerning the trust property belongs to, became the person directly involved and settled the trust affairs. The supreme court confirms that the trustee did not settle trust affairs as the owner of the trust property, but rather by borrowing the personality of the trustee. In other words, in the trust establishment process, the trust borrows the personality of the trustee and takes on the trustee name for the trust property. Article 31 of the Korea Trust Act does not define the trustee as the owner of the trust property and the subject to whom the rights and duties concerning the trust property belongs is regarded by the trust borrowing the personality of the trustee to manage and settle the trust property under the trustee’s own name and account. This is the first supreme court case in Korea, setting a precedent on the methods of the trust borrowing the personality of the trustee.