국세기본법 제22조의 2 해석론을 중심으로 한 당초처분과 경정처분의 관계 (The Relation between Originally-Determined Assessment and Reassessment ―Legal Analysis on Article 22－2 of Framework Act on National Taxes―)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국세법학회
· 수록지 정보 : 조세법연구 / 14권 / 3호 / 397 ~ 431페이지
· 저자명 : 박요찬

초록

2002.12.18. 국세기본법 제22조의 2가 규정되었다. 정부는 그 입법취지를 “결정처분과 경정처분을 별개로 분리함으로써 결정처분이 경정처분에 흡수되어 결정처분에 근거한 가산금 결정이나 체납처분 등의 선행절차가 효력을 잃는 사례를 방지하고 결정처분에 대한 불복제기기간 등이 경과하여 이미 확정된 처분에 대해서는 다시 다툴 수 없게 함으로써 법적 안정성을 도모함과 아울러 고의적으로 소액의 경정사유를 제공하여 증액경정처분을 받아 이미 불복제기기간이 경과한 당초결정에 대하여 불복 청구하는 등의 악용사례를 막기 위하여 立法된 것이다”라고 설명하고 있다. 한편 지금까지 논의된 학설로는 흡수설, 병존설, 역흡수설, 흡수병존설 등이 존재하고 판례는 증액경정처분에 대하여는 흡수설의 입장에서, 누진과세경정처분에 대하여는 세액의 일부취소의 입장을 견지하여 왔다. 위 규정의 신설로 그 동안 판례와 학설에서 거론되어 오던 당초처분과 경정처분의 관계에 대한 재검토가 필요하게 되었다. 본 연구는 당초처분과 경정처분의 본질을 흡수설로 설명하면서 다만, 위 규정을 납세자의 쟁송권에 대한 제한정도로 해석하고자 한다.

영어초록

In December 18, 2002, in Article 22－2 of Framework Act on National Taxes (hereinafter referred to as ‘moot point’), it is stipulated 「① Reassessment decision, which is to increase the originally-determined tax amount in accor- dance with the regulations of the tax act, may not influence the framework act on the originally-determined tax amount or rights and obligations stipulated in the tax act. ② Reassessment decision, which is to decrease the originally- determined tax amount in accordance with the regulations of the tax act, may not influence the framework act on tax amounts exclusive of tax amounts to be decreased by the reassessment.」
The government explains the purpose of legislation 「The originally-determined assessment should be separated from reassessment in order that the assessment decision may not be absorbed into the reassessment decision. In case the assessment decision is absorbed into the reassessment decision, preceding formalities, such as delinquency disposition or fines for default determined on the basis of the originally-determined assessment, become invalid. Thus, the assessment decision should be separated from each other in order to prevent such cases. Also in case of separating such assessment decisions from each other, any objections should not be made to assessment decisions that were definitely settled posterior to the period of the appeal of dissatisfaction, and as a result the legal system can be stabilized. In addition, it is to prevent cases of intentionally causing small-sum matters to be rectified. In case of causing a small-sum matter to be rectified, the amount of rectified reassessment may be again increased and so dissatisfaction may be appealed to original decision.」 On the one hand, the theory of absorption, the theory of coexistence, the theory of reverse absorption and the theory of absorption and coexistence have influenced precedents. The precedent on the reassessment decision of which original amount to be rectified on the increase has been based on the theory of absorption. But, in the precedent, the reassessment decision of which original amount to be reflected on the decrease tax amount has been partially cancelled. Since the foregoing moot point has been newly established, however, original assessment decision and reassessment decision need to be reviewed.
This study was based on the existing precedents and theories, but dealt with the above-mentioned theory as little as need as it has been sufficiently dis- cussed. In addition, this study aims to review theoretical bases on new view- points so as to ascertain whether such theories meet with the rights of tax- payers and the public interests of tax administration.

참고자료

· 없음