2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. On July 11, 2006, the Plaintiff borrowed 000 US dollars from a new bank on June 25, 2009, and repaid 000 US dollars at the maturity date. During that period, the Plaintiff entered into a currency swap contract with the purport that the Plaintiff shall pay interest on 000 US dollars to the new bank, and that the new bank shall pay interest on 00 US dollars to the Plaintiff.

B. On November 10, 2010, the Defendant: (a) reported corporate tax for the business year 2008, the Plaintiff disposed of KRW 000 as 4 reserve; and (b) reported corporate tax for the business year 2009, the monetary swap contract was terminated; (c) confirmed that only KRW 00 was disposed of as non-deductible expenses; and (d) imposed corporate tax 000 (including additional tax, and hereinafter the same shall apply) on the Plaintiff for the business year 2009 (hereinafter referred to as “first disposition”).

C. Accordingly, on January 19, 201, the Plaintiff filed an objection with the Director of the Daejeon Regional Tax Office, and the Director of the Daejeon Regional Tax Office issued a decision to revoke the Plaintiff’s primary disposition of imposition of tax base for the year 2009 on the premise that the Plaintiff disposition of tax base of KRW 00 in excessive gross income was made for the year 2008 as the disposition of tax base for exclusion from deductible income.

D. On May 12, 2011, the Defendant revoked the first disposition upon the determination of the commissioner of the Daejeon Regional Tax Office and revoked the first disposition.

The plaintiff imposed the corporate tax of 000 won for the business year of 2008 (hereinafter referred to as "the second disposition").

E. Accordingly, on July 8, 201, the Plaintiff made a decision that the Commissioner of the National Tax Service’s request for examination, and the Commissioner of the National Tax Service made a decision that the second disposition that the Plaintiff should withhold 00 won from total exclusion from total exclusion from taxable income in the year 2008, and that the said 00 won should be reserved from total exclusion from taxable income in the business year 2009, and that the second disposition that was taken by deeming 00 won to be excessive exclusion from taxable income in the business year 2008 was revoked.

F. On November 1, 2009, the Defendant revoked the secondary disposition following the foregoing review and determination, and imposed KRW 000 on the Plaintiff KRW 00 of the corporate tax for the business year 2009 on November 1, 201 by reserving the amount of KRW 200 as non-deductible expenses.

G. On November 18, 201, the Defendant corrected the amount of additional tax of KRW 000,000, which was verified by an error on November 18, 201 (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Grounds for Recognition] Unsured Facts, Gap evidence 1 to Gap evidence 12, and the whole purport of the pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

1) The defendant issued the first disposition imposing corporate tax of 000 won for the year 2009 on the ground that the tax adjustment under the plaintiff's currency swap contract was erroneous, but the second disposition imposing corporate tax of 000 won for the year 2008 was revoked, and the second disposition again imposed corporate tax of 2009 for the year 209 upon the revocation of the second disposition was made again, and it was unlawful for the defendant to reverse the previous disposition without any special reason after recognizing the grounds for objection to the disposition as appropriate.

2) If the Plaintiff assumed that the currency swap gains accrued in 2008 were accounted for accounts that are recognized as 000 won in the currency swap (fixed assets), and on the balance sheet in 2008, there were 9700 won in the currency swap (investment assets) and 000 won in the currency swap (fixed debts) as of the end of the currency swap transaction in 2009, and the settlement of accounts that eliminate the related assets and liabilities was made, and the currency swap loss and 000 won in the currency swap transaction loss and 000 won in the currency swap transaction, and the above 00 won was generated in the currency swap transaction loss and the above 00 won was included in the calculation of non-deductible loss, and the income disposition was confirmed in the calculation of 00 won in the currency swap loss indicated in the net amount in 209, and thus, the withholding disposition in this case was unlawful by deeming that the reserved amount in 2008 has not been ratified as non-inclusion of corporate tax.

B. Relevant statutes

It is as shown in the attached Form.

C. Determination

1) Determination on the first argument

In a case where the grounds for objection are recognized to be correct in the process of appeal as to the taxation disposition, and the necessary disposition was made accordingly, the appeal system and the method of correction can not be reversed without any special reasons (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Du18161, Jun. 24, 2010). However, as seen earlier, the defendant deemed that the business adjustment was erroneous in the Plaintiff’s business year of tax adjustment in 2009, and the plaintiff asserted that there was no error in its tax adjustment, and the Daejeon Director of the Regional Tax Office revoked the first disposition in the purport that the Plaintiff was erroneous in the tax adjustment for the business year 2008, and accordingly, the defendant revoked the second disposition. Accordingly, the defendant's revocation of the first disposition is not because the plaintiff revoked the second disposition, and the defendant's revocation of the second disposition is not justified, and the plaintiff's ground for appeal is not re-reconvened with the purport of the first disposition by the Commissioner of the National Tax Service without any special reason.

2) The amendment of the relevant laws and subordinate statutes

According to Article 42 (1) 3 of the former Corporate Tax Act (amended by Act No. 10423, Dec. 30, 2010); Article 73 subparagraph 5 and 3 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Corporate Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 19891, Feb. 28, 2007); subparagraph 5 and subparagraph 3 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Corporate Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 20691, Feb. 22, 2008); and subparagraph 5 and subparagraph 3 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Corporate Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 20691, Feb. 22, 2008), where the book value of assets and liabilities owned by a domestic corporation increases or decreases, it shall not be included in the amount of income for the pertinent business year; however, in cases of monetary-related derivatives or currency swap contracts held by a person other than a financial institution as the plaintiff to avoid exchange risk of foreign currency assets and liabilities, it may be evaluated as income for each business year.

B) Meanwhile, according to the above evidence, the details of the Plaintiff’s accounting and tax adjustment related to the currency swap transaction are as follows.

(Omission of Details of Tax Adjustment)

C) Examining the lawful tax adjustment under the monetary swap contract of this case, and until 2007, the monetary swap evaluation profit is all included in the calculation of income amount, and 000 won (=00 won +000 won) that the Plaintiff recognizes as losses are all included in the calculation of losses, and no separate tax adjustment is required. In the case of 2008, the monetary swap evaluation profit recognized as profits in the corporate accounting standards is excluded from the calculation of income amount, and thus, 000 won needs to be excluded in the calculation of earnings and there is a need for tax adjustment to dispose of it as A reserve. Meanwhile, in the business year 2009, when the monetary swap contract of this case is terminated, there is a need for tax adjustment of the opposite details of the existing reservation, and therefore, 00 won should be disposed as the reservation of all existing A reservation. Accordingly, since the monetary swap profit is recognized as 00 won in the calculation of losses in the calculation of losses for the business year of 209, and the Defendant’s disposition imposing corporate tax on this case is legitimate (it is recognized as 0000 won in the above tax adjustment loss.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.