Abstract
The purpose of this study was to investigate lots of problems that the current tax appeal system has, which are becoming serious issues as tax appeal cases are recently increasing. Those problems include the unreasonable procedure and period of deliberation on tax appeal cases, permission of a same tax appeal by more than one governmental agencies and the compulsory transposition system of tax appeal cases. All of these problems should be rectified in order to ensure that the currently tax appeal system protect taxpayers' rights and interests effectively. According to the current tax appeal system, the period from the receipt of tax appeal cases to ruling on them is up to 90 days. This is unrealistic, so that period should be allowed to be extended if those cases about more complicated taxation or if they are even harder to be treated for any reason. At present, chief of Tax Tribunal has to unconditionally accept resolution from the meeting of tax judges and make a ruling accordingly because he has no right to reject that resolution. But now, it's time to establish legal grounds based on which the chief suggests the tax judges to reconsider their resolution if it is undoubtedly wrong. Currently, there's a relatively little acceptance of tax appeals from people who can't financially afford to designate a proxy for them. To solve this problem, lots of efforts to make socially recognized the necessity to relive those people's rights and interests and make widely known the Public Proxy of Tax Appeal System. The current tax appeal system allows the Board of Audit and Inspection to be an appealer. This means taxation may be deliberated on by more than one governmental agencies. It is so inefficient. Therefore, tax appeal by the board should be only about taxation that they found unacceptable by audit and inspection. Except for this, it is not allowed that the Board of Audit and Inspection file tax appeals that are, in turn, necessarily transported to the National Taxation. Esecially, the transposition should be a procedure that is occasionally taken. In sum, this study investigated problems with the current tax appeal system, and made suggestions about solutions that are not theoretical but practical.
최근 심판청구사건이 증가하는 추세와 조세심판구조, 심판기간, 심판청구 중복, 심판청구사건에 대한 심리 및 재결, 그리고 심판전치주의 등 광범위한 영역에서 많은 문제점을 분석을 할 수 있다. 현행 심판청구제도가 납세자의 권익구제를 실효성 있게 보장하기 위해서는 개선이 필요하다. 심판청구사건이 접수의 현실을 감안, 현행 90일의 재결기간은 비현실적이므로 처분의 내용이 복잡하거나, 개별사건의 난이도 사유가 있는 경우에는 재결기간을 연장. 조세심판원장은 조세심판관회의의 의결내용을 거부할 권한이 없으므로 의결에 따라 재결 의결내용이 명백히 잘못된 경우에는 재심리를 권고할 수 있도록 별도의 근거규정이 필요하다. 경제적 사정으로 대리인을 선임하지 못한 소액 불복청구의 인용률이 상대적으로 낮아 영세납세자에 대한 권리구제의 필요성과 국선심판청구대리인 제도의 홍보를 강화해야 할 것이다. 감사원의 심사청구는 각기 다른 기관에서 동일한 조세심판업무를 중복적으로 수행하는 것은 비효율을 초래할 수 있으므로 감사원법에 의한 심사청구는 그 불복대상을 감사원의 감사로 인한 처분으로 제한하고, 필요적 전치절차로 되어 있는 국세청의 심사청구는 임의절차로 전환의 필요성이 본 연구는 현행의 조세심판청구제도의 문제점과 개선점을 이론적 논의보다는 실무적 차원에서 연구의 시사점을 제시하고 있다.
