$\require{mediawiki-texvc}$
  • 검색어에 아래의 연산자를 사용하시면 더 정확한 검색결과를 얻을 수 있습니다.
  • 검색연산자
검색연산자 기능 검색시 예
() 우선순위가 가장 높은 연산자 예1) (나노 (기계 | machine))
공백 두 개의 검색어(식)을 모두 포함하고 있는 문서 검색 예1) (나노 기계)
예2) 나노 장영실
| 두 개의 검색어(식) 중 하나 이상 포함하고 있는 문서 검색 예1) (줄기세포 | 면역)
예2) 줄기세포 | 장영실
! NOT 이후에 있는 검색어가 포함된 문서는 제외 예1) (황금 !백금)
예2) !image
* 검색어의 *란에 0개 이상의 임의의 문자가 포함된 문서 검색 예) semi*
"" 따옴표 내의 구문과 완전히 일치하는 문서만 검색 예) "Transform and Quantization"
쳇봇 이모티콘
안녕하세요!
ScienceON 챗봇입니다.
궁금한 것은 저에게 물어봐주세요.

논문 상세정보

조세법상 부정행위로 인한 부과제척기간 연장규정의 해석 및 적용기준에 관한 연구 ― 부과제척기간 연장규정이 배제되는 ‘특별한 사정’을 중심으로

A Study on the Interpretation and Application Standard of the Extension Stipulation of the Limitation Period of National Tax Due to an Fraudulent Means Under the Tax Law ― An Emphasis on the Particular Reason Which Excludes the Extension Stipulation of the Limitation Period of National Tax ―

조세법연구 v.21 no.2 , 2015년, pp.7 - 47   http://dx.doi.org/10.16974/stlr.2015.21.2.001001
박준영, 정지선
초록

As the tax law has basically a characteristic breaching on the property right of taxpayers, the system such as the limitation period for national to secure th tax law. But to ensure that the tax office exercise its right of taxation despite any fraudulent means of taxpayers, the tax law provides a long limitation period for national tax as an exception. However, concerning the application of the extension stipulation of the limitation period for national tax against any fraudulent means of taxpayers, there will be no problem if a taxpayer is involved in a fraudulent means, but there can be disputes over the application of the extension stipulation of limitation period if a taxpayer is not directly involved in a fraudulent means but becomes a tax evader due to a fraudulent means of other person. Even though taxpayers perform their tax duties through their agents under a power of attorney and actually such per- formances via agents are increasing, there have not been made many studies on such cases, but there only have been decisions of the supreme court:Sentence made on September by the supreme court and 2009DU1510 Decision by the supreme court (called “Daesang Decision" hereinafter) concerning such cases. However, the Daesang Decision is different in the position from the previous position of the supreme court regarding the interpretation and application of the exemption stipulation for punishment under the tax law, especially different in the decision standard for the application of the extension stipulation of the limitation period for national tax about the fraudulent means under Sub-paragraph 1 of Paragraph 1 of Article 26-2, the National Tax Basic Law from the previous decision. Hence, the Tax court makes decisions on the basis of the decision of the Daesang decision or decisions of the lower court concerning similar cases because there are no enough reviews on the Daesang Decision. Especially, the decisions of TaxDecision2014JI233 and 2014.12.9. by the Tax Court (called “Daesang Precedent" hereinafter) does not consider the difference in the Daesang Precedent and the fact and quotes the Daesang Decision in making its decisions, so it is necessary to review the Daesang Decision for the sake of protecting taxpayers. Therefore, this study reviewed the interpretation theory and application of the extension stipulation of the limitation period for national tax due to fraudulent means under the Tax Law with the emphasis on the feasibility of the Daesang Decision, namely, this study separated the scope of the subject of fraudulent means and the application standard of the related stipulation in reviewing, to examine the difference between the previous application standard of the supreme court and the Daesang Decision concerning the related stipulation and to examine the limitation of application, especially how the particular reason can be identified which is possible exclude the responsibility of the taxpayer which is mentioned in the Daesang Decision.

참고문헌 (0)

  1. 이 논문의 참고문헌 없음

이 논문을 인용한 문헌 (0)

  1. 이 논문을 인용한 문헌 없음

원문보기

원문 PDF 다운로드

  • 원문 PDF 정보가 존재하지 않습니다.

원문 URL 링크

  • 원문 URL 링크 정보가 존재하지 않습니다.
상세조회 0건 원문조회 0건

DOI 인용 스타일