2025년 국제조세 및 관세 판결의 분석과 전망

The purpose of this article is to review the 2025 rulings of the Supreme Court of Korea (“SCK”) regarding international tax and customs and to analyze their theoretical and practical significance, along with their future implications for tax policy. The details of the analysis are provided below. First, the SCK ruling 2024Du61544 (February 13, 2025 dismissal without further examination) held that income generated from virtual asset trading did not constitute “income derived from the transfer of domestic assets”, or “economic benefits received in connection with assets located in Korea” under the former Individual Income Tax Act. This conclusion is appropriate, as it takes into account the unique characteristics of virtual assets rooted in blockchain technology. Second, the SCK ruling 2024Du58920 (February 20, 2025, dismissal without further examination) followed the SCK’s previous stance on the zero rate of value added tax for earning foreign currency as well as established non-taxation practices. It is necessary to initiate legislative discussions and administrative preparations regarding whether to include Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs) and stablecoins within the scope of the zero rate system. Third, the SCK ruling 2025Du33231 (June 12, 2025, dismissal without further examination) regarded sales volume as a key factor in determining the comparability under the Cost Plus Method and clarified the interpretation of Article 15, Paragraphs 5 and 6 of the Enforcement Decree of the Adjustment of International Taxes Act. Furthermore, the SCK ruling 2024Du54065 (October 16, 2025) presented specific factors for evaluating comparable transactions in the small home appliance and medical equipment sectors. These decisions are expected to serve as vital precedents for calculating arm's length prices in similar businesses or industries. Fourth, the SCK ruling 2022Du45647 (April 24, 2025) clarified the legal nature of regulations concerning the extension of customs audits and established the criteria for determining what constitutes a “significant procedural violation”. This decision is expected to be applicable to similar international tax audits.