종합소득세부과처분취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On September 194, 1994, the Plaintiff entered the office of the secretary general of the B University, and performed duties such as the head of the Office of Administration and the Deputy Secretary General.
The Plaintiff was indicted for committing the crime of taking property in breach of trust with the following content and was sentenced to KRW 1 year and six months of imprisonment, additional collection of KRW 197,135,00 on July 6, 2012:
(Seoul Central District Court 2012Gohap634). On April 2009, the Plaintiff received an illegal request from C to continuously maintain transaction with the said University by offering computer-related expendable goods, etc. at the lower parking lot of the building in B University. The Plaintiff received KRW 5 million in cash, in exchange for an illegal request from B University.
In addition, the Plaintiff was granted KRW 197,135,00 in total on 29 occasions from January 2006 to April 2009 from C as above.
As seen above, the Plaintiff received a total of KRW 197,135,000 in exchange for illegal solicitation in the course of performing its duties.
On the other hand, both the plaintiff and the prosecutor appealed (Seoul High Court 2012No2250), and the appellate court reversed the above first instance judgment on the grounds of unfair sentencing on November 9, 2012, and sentenced the plaintiff to the suspension of execution three years, 160 hours, 197, 135,00 won, and the above judgment became final and conclusive around that time.
B. On April 21, 2014, the Defendant deemed the amount of KRW 72,00,000 received in the year 2006 (hereinafter “the instant money”) as the Plaintiff’s other income and notified the Defendant of the rectification and correction of the global income tax of KRW 39,38,90 (including additional tax for negligent tax returns of KRW 2,778,164, additional tax for negligent tax of KRW 15,751,145) for the amount of money determined as the amount of property in breach of trust in the above judgment.
(hereinafter “instant disposition”). On July 3, 2014, the Plaintiff appealed and filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal, but was dismissed on November 24, 2014.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, 5, Eul evidence 1 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The case.