법인세등부과처분취소
1. Of the instant lawsuit, the Defendant limited to the Plaintiff on July 28, 2015:
(a) 39,363,920 corporate tax of 2010;
1. Details of the disposition;
A. A. A law firm B (hereinafter referred to as “instant legal entity”) is a legal entity established on September 13, 2002 for the purpose of running the business, etc. belonging to a lawyer’s duties, and the Plaintiff is a person registered as a member of the register of the said legal entity from March 10, 2008 to August 21, 2012.
B. On May 2, 2014, the Defendant imposed 32,858,120 won of corporate tax in 2010, 1,000,300,270 won of corporate tax in 2011, 2010, and 501,717,980 won of value-added tax in 2010, and value-added tax in 2011, but the said corporation did not pay it within the payment period. However, the Plaintiff registered as a member of the said corporation during the same period was designated as the secondary taxpayer, and imposed the following dispositions against the Plaintiff on the Plaintiff on July 28, 2015: < Amended by Act No. 13508, Jul. 28, 2015>
(hereinafter) The following four dispositions are successively referred to as "each disposition of this case", and they are collectively referred to as "each disposition of this case". The aggregate of the principal tax of this case and the additional tax (won) of the corporate tax of 2010 32,858,1205,65,800 39,363,920 1,000,270,270 198,059,401,401,198,359,670 3203,2010 15,50,160,6270,627,003,627,000,000,0000,0019,127, 1601, 2011, 3201, 3208, 305, 307, 97, 97, 1964,57, 197,5847
C. On September 2, 2015, the Plaintiff appealed and requested for adjudication on September 2, 2015, but the Tax Tribunal rendered a decision to dismiss the Plaintiff’s claim on March 15, 2016.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 52, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. We examine ex officio determination as to the part of each disposition of this case seeking the revocation of the additional dues from among the dispositions of this case, as to whether the part claiming revocation of additional dues is legitimate.
If the national tax is not paid by the due date, the additional dues or increased additional dues as provided in Articles 21 and 22 of the National Tax Collection Act is also a law without a fixed procedure of the tax office.