법률행위 해석을 통한 엔화스왑예금에서 발생한 소득의 성격 규명

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Income Tax Act is based on the positive system, and thus taxes are not imposed on unspecified incomes. Hereat, the negative system has been applied to the Income Tax Act in order to solve the problem. To give a typical example, Item 13 was newly added in Clause 1, Article 16 of the Income Tax Act on December 31, 2001 at the amendment to the 6557th Act.
At the time when the Income Tax Act was to be amended, banks began to introduce financial derivatives so as to attract the wealthy and also accelerated the development of highly profitable financial instruments. At the same time the wealthy, account holders, began to take interest in high-yield instruments. In those days, many PB centers dealt in the Japanese-yen swap deposit, i.e., an instrument to combine forward trading and a time deposit.
The Japanese-yen swab deposit seemed to come under Item 13, Clause 1, Article 16 of the former Income Tax Act to be enforced from January 1, 2002. On August 2004, South Korea’s Tax Service asked the Ministry of Finance and Economy to define the foreign-exchange profit generated from the swap deposit, whereat the Ministry administratively interpreted it as an interest income on March 30, 2005.
It is advisable to regard the foreign-exchange profit generated from the Japanese-yen swap deposit as an interest income. The swap deposit was developed inasmuch as the intention of a bank to raise funds was in accord with that of account holders to make interest incomes, namely, the consensus between the bank and account holders. Thus, it is appropriate to consider it to be an interest income from the viewpoint of natural interpretation. Moreover, it is possible to make a teleological interpretation of the purposefulness stipulated in Article 18 of the Framework Act on National Taxes, by extension, to have concrete access. In result, it is reasonable to interpret the foreign-exchange profit as an interest income.
Currently, several cases of Japanese-yen swap deposits are pending in the court of first instance or second instance. Given the fact that such trials are performed after the positive system-based Income Tax Act applied the negative system to interest incomes, the courts’ rulings are likely to influence the amendment of the Income Tax Act whatever results.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Ⅰ. 서론
• Ⅱ. 엔화스왑예금의 일반론
• Ⅲ. 엔화스왑예금 관련 판례 추이
• Ⅳ. 우리나라 소득세법상 이자소득과 미국의 유사 규정
• Ⅴ. 법률행위의 해석과 엔화스왑예금 관련 계약
• Ⅵ. 결론
• 〈참고문헌〉
• 〈Abstract〉

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 백태승, "민법총칙(제4판)" 법문사 2009

2 김현준, "파생금융상품의 과세에 관한 연구" 서울대학교 대학원 2006

3 노영훈, "파생금융상품의 개발을 통한 조세회피와 그 대응방안" 한국조세연구원 2005

4 이성우, "파생금융상품거래의 과세에 관한 연구" 서울대학교 대학원 1997

5 송민경, "엔화스왑예금거래와 조세법률주의" 법원도서관 121 : 2010

6 정운오, "엔화스왑예금 과세사건 판결의 분석" 한국세법학회 16 (16): 122-162, 2010

7 전병욱, "엔화스왑예금 거래의 과세에 대한 경제적, 법률적 연구" 한국회계학회 16 (16): 161-188, 2007

8 김완석, "소득세법론" 광교이택스 2008

9 최명근, "세법학총론" 세경사 2007

10 "선물환거래와 연계된 엔화예금(엔화스왑예금)에 대한 과세방침 확정.통보"

11 "법제처 국가법령정보센터"

12 송희성, "법률행위의 해석" 2005

13 김준호, "민법강의" 법문사 2004

14 "미국 국세청"

15 "대법원 종합법률정보"

16 정운오, "금융소득 과세에 관한 연구- 이자소득과 자본이득의 구분을 중심으로 -" 한국국제조세협회 26 (26): 261-308, 2010

17 "국세청 국세법령정보시스템"