RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색
다국어 입력

http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

예시)
  • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
  • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
닫기
    인기검색어 순위 펼치기

    RISS 인기검색어

      KCI우수등재

      판례평석(判例評釋) : 신뢰보호원칙과 정당한 사유에 대한 가산세 면제 -대법원 2012. 9. 27. 선고 2012두11607 판결- = Analysis on Court Decesion : The Confidence Protection Principle and the Tax Penalty Exemption for Reasonable Cause

      한글로보기

      https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A99923512

      • 0

        상세조회
      • 0

        다운로드
      서지정보 열기
      • 내보내기
      • 내책장담기
      • 공유하기
      • 오류접수

      부가정보

      다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

      In this case the meaning of investment that was an object of taxation carried forward according to Restriction of Special Taxation Act was at issue. The taxpayer recognized that it was unclear whether contribution to a medical corporation was included in the investment, and intended to follow the answer of a revenue officer in order to minimize the risk due to the unclear code. But the Supreme Court of Korea concluded that contribution to a medical corporation was not eligible for taxation carried forward and the Confidence Protection Principle did not apply to unofficial answer of a revenue officer and there was no reasonable cause for tax penalty exemption. Considering the facts that the certified tax attorney and the revenue officer advised contribution to a medical corporation was included in the investment, and there was no reassessment after the tax investigation, the meaning of investment was not clear. Thus the result of this case means that the taxpayer was burdened with the defect of the unclear code entirely. This position of Supreme Court of Korea on the Confidence Protection Principle and the tax penalty exemption for reasonable cause is insufficient to mitigate the burden of the taxpayer.
      번역하기

      In this case the meaning of investment that was an object of taxation carried forward according to Restriction of Special Taxation Act was at issue. The taxpayer recognized that it was unclear whether contribution to a medical corporation was included...

      In this case the meaning of investment that was an object of taxation carried forward according to Restriction of Special Taxation Act was at issue. The taxpayer recognized that it was unclear whether contribution to a medical corporation was included in the investment, and intended to follow the answer of a revenue officer in order to minimize the risk due to the unclear code. But the Supreme Court of Korea concluded that contribution to a medical corporation was not eligible for taxation carried forward and the Confidence Protection Principle did not apply to unofficial answer of a revenue officer and there was no reasonable cause for tax penalty exemption. Considering the facts that the certified tax attorney and the revenue officer advised contribution to a medical corporation was included in the investment, and there was no reassessment after the tax investigation, the meaning of investment was not clear. Thus the result of this case means that the taxpayer was burdened with the defect of the unclear code entirely. This position of Supreme Court of Korea on the Confidence Protection Principle and the tax penalty exemption for reasonable cause is insufficient to mitigate the burden of the taxpayer.

      더보기

      분석정보

      View

      상세정보조회

      0

      Usage

      원문다운로드

      0

      대출신청

      0

      복사신청

      0

      EDDS신청

      0

      동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

      더보기

      주제

      연도별 연구동향

      연도별 활용동향

      연관논문

      연구자 네트워크맵

      공동연구자 (7)

      유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

      연관 공개강의(KOCW)

      이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

      나만을 위한 추천자료

      해외이동버튼