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

A. The Plaintiff is a specialized credit financial business company under the Specialized Credit Financial Business Act that carries on the issuance and management of credit cards, debit cards, pre-paid cards, and settlement of payments related to the use of the said cards.

B. The Plaintiff invested x million won in the establishment of an information protection system (hereinafter “instant system”) in the business year 201x and 201x, and the amount of the investment is subject to tax credits for investment, etc., such as safety facilities under the Restriction of Special Taxation Act, etc. However, on the grounds that the aforementioned tax credits on the instant system were omitted at the time of filing the initial corporate tax base return. x. x. 201x. 201x. 201x. 201x. 201x. 201x.

C. Regarding this, the Defendant rejected the Plaintiff’s request for correction on the ground that “the instant system constitutes an investment for the protection of personal information or for the Plaintiff’s own business, not an investment in “technology outflow prevention facilities” subject to tax credit under Article 25 of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

D. The Plaintiff filed a request for a trial on the instant disposition with the Tax Tribunal on x. x. x. x. but was dismissed on x. x. x. 201.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. Summary of the plaintiff's assertion

The instant system constitutes an information protection system as a technology leakage prevention facility listed in Article 13(6) and [Attachment 8] of the Enforcement Rule of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act, and thus, in accordance with Article 25(1)9 of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act, tax credits under Article 25(1)9 of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act shall be granted for the year 201x and 201x million won of investment in the instant system, and for the year 201x, tax credits under Article 25(1)9 of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act (if that falls under the information protection system where the Plaintiff is obligated to install by electronic financial

Even if "the purpose of preventing technology leakage" is to establish an information protection system, the technology includes both transaction-related information, intellectual property, company's unique business process and business know-how, which should be protected for business, and the system of this case is established for the purpose of protecting credit card settlement process technology, business know-how, credit card-related information, and personal information of card holders, which are the plaintiff's technology, and preventing the leakage from being leaked to the outside. Thus, the above tax credit should be granted.

Therefore, the instant disposition taken on a different premise should be revoked as it is unlawful.

(b) Relevant statutes: Omitted;

C. Determination

1) Under the principle of no taxation without law, the interpretation of tax laws and regulations shall be interpreted in accordance with the text of the law, barring any special circumstance, and shall not be extensively interpreted or analogically interpreted without reasonable cause. In particular, it accords with the principle of fair taxation with the principle of fair taxation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2002Du9537, Jan. 14, 2003; 2008Du11372, Aug. 20, 2009). Meanwhile, the burden of proving the requirements for corporate tax reduction and exemption under the provision of tax reduction and exemption is on the taxpayer who asserts the grounds for such reduction and exemption (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 94Nu12708, Apr. 26, 1996; 208Du7830, Oct. 23, 2008).

Article 25 (1) 9 of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act (hereinafter referred to as "the Restriction of Special Taxation Act") provides that "where a national makes an investment in facilities prescribed by Presidential Decree as deemed necessary for industrial policies among technology leakage prevention facilities, an amount equivalent to 3/100 of the amount of such investment shall be deducted from income tax or corporate tax." Article 22 (1) 10 of the Enforcement Decree of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act provides that "facilities prescribed by Presidential Decree in the main sentence of Article 25 (1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act (hereinafter referred to as "facilities prescribed by Ordinance of the Ministry of Strategy and Finance, such as information protection systems, etc." shall mean facilities corresponding to those prescribed by Ordinance of the Ministry of Strategy and Finance, and Article 13 (6) and [Attachment 8] of the Enforcement Rule of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act provides that "a national shall be exempted from income tax or corporate tax for the prevention of technology leakage among facilities falling under the information protection systems," "a certified product," "system security product," and "the security product of this case shall be exempted from tax reduction or exemption."

On the other hand, the Special Tax Treatment Control Act does not separately stipulate the meaning of ‘technology outflow prevention facilities' or ‘technology outflow prevention facilities' and does not provide for the applicable provisions to ‘technology outflow prevention facilities'. However, the meaning of ‘technology outflow prevention facilities' in the provisions of this case is that the ‘technology outflow prevention facilities' are facilities to prevent the leakage of technology, and the prior meaning of technology is the method or capacity to deal with things in human life by applying scientific theories, ② The provisions of this case are newly established in the Special Tax Treatment Control Act as amended on December 31, 2004 for the purpose of preventing industrial damage caused by industrial technology outflow, and the purpose of legislation of the same case is to protect industrial technology by inducing the above investment as a tax credit for technology outflow prevention facilities, and to protect industrial technology from the ‘technical diffusion facilities' or ‘technical diffusion of industrial technology' in the Enforcement Rule of the Special Tax Treatment Control Act (the provisions of this case are to prevent the transfer of industrial technology and industrial technology to the same extent as the above, and to protect industrial technology from spreading and industrial technology (the provisions of this case are to protect industrial technology leakage).

2) In full view of the overall purport of the pleadings, the following facts are acknowledged in the statement No. 2-1 through No. 7, and No. 3-1 through No. 13.

A) The instant system constitutes an information protection system among technology leakage prevention facilities listed in [Attachment 8] of the Enforcement Rule of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act, and its detailed details are as listed below.

B) Encrypt and certified products of the instant system [SKI-based products] ① “to protect information on transactions, such as card numbers received and sent during the process of obtaining the card, payment amount, customer name, etc.”, or “to protect information on the issuance of cards, such as card numbers used at the time of issuing the card at the time of issuing the card or at the time of issuing the card at the time of issuing the card, customer personal information, and password,” and ② among them, the SSL equipment is to prevent damage to users of the Internet homepage, and to protect the information transmission and reception section, and to protect personal information, etc. on the website.

C) Of the instant system, network security products are installed to protect information transmitted and received through a network, which is to protect information received and received in the process of obtaining and settling credit cards, etc. issued by the Plaintiff. In particular, among them, network security products refer to a facility that protects information transmitted and received through a network (including card numbers, settlement payments, personal information of card holders customers, franchise stores, etc.) through a network in a way that can be used as if the network was built as an exclusive line.

D) Of the system of this case, the system security products are established to protect information such as "resident registration, card number, account number, business registration number, etc.", and 1. Of them, 6 chrons

At the time of purchase of ‘the daily strengthening of security', ‘the statement of introduction' is written as follows, and ② the statement of ‘the web detection system' prepared at the time of purchase of ‘the web detection system' is written as follows, and ‘the purpose of promotion' and ‘the background of promotion' are written as follows:

【Introductions】

○ Registration of personal information protection pedagos

* Resident Number, card number, account number, business registration number, etc.

The number of times of appearance by item, such as resident numbers, card numbers, etc.

○ The addition of cell phone numbers of executives and employees in connection with the organization

○ After approval, an attachment file encryption, etc.

[Purpose and background of promotion]

1. Objectives of promotion;

- For the efficient prevention and response of intrusion incidents caused by malicious web screening files against the Internet web servers, the prompt detection and verification of the web accelerators

2. Implementation background;

- Increase in security of information, such as leakage of customer information through the web in accordance with the recent changes in hacking process;

- Since the web accelerator detection using existing security systems is limited, it is necessary to take effective web accelerator security measures.

E) In accordance with the Electronic Financial Supervision Regulations (Notice No. 2011-18, Oct. 10, 201, 201; hereinafter the same), “the system for blocking access to radio communication networks, etc.” (Article 12 subparag. 5), “information protection system, security measures for radio communication networks, system for blocking radio communication networks” (Article 15), and “a malicious code search and treatment program” (Article 16) are all the same as the information protection system set forth in attached Table 8 of the Enforcement Rule of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act or are the same as that of the information protection system set forth in attached Table 8.

4) In light of the following circumstances revealed by the above facts, it is difficult to view the information to be protected by the instant system established by the Plaintiff as technology. Moreover, the instant system is an information protection system that is a financial institution under the former Electronic Financial Transactions Act, and thus, it cannot be deemed that the instant system constitutes an information protection system that is subject to the instant provision on reduction and exemption. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s assertion on a different premise cannot be accepted.

A) The protection of the instant system appears to be information on transactions, such as details of transactions, business stores, customer information, etc. acquired by the Plaintiff in the course of conducting financial business.

B) The fact that information acquired by business, such as customer information, is stored in the data form, or it is inevitable to keep it in the data form, cannot be acknowledged that there is a technology protected by the relevant system solely on the ground that it has an information protection system. Although the Plaintiff submitted Gap evidence No. 6 (Examination Articles) and Gap evidence No. 11 (Patent Information Search Service screen) to the effect that there is a special technology he/she holds, the Plaintiff has a patented technology, there is no specific explanation on how the pertinent technology is protected by the instant system, and there is no other specific assertion and proof on the fact that the Plaintiff prevents the leakage of technology by the instant system.

C) According to the former Electronic Financial Transactions Act (amended by Act No. 11814, May 22, 2013; hereinafter the same), a specialized credit financial business company under the Specialized Credit Financial Business Act, as a financial institution, is obligated to comply with the standards set by the Financial Services Commission with respect to personnel, facilities, and electronic equipment for electronic transmission or processing by type of electronic financial transactions so as to ensure the safety and reliability of electronic financial transactions, and the Financial Services Commission may order a credit card company to suspend all or part of its credit card business, etc. for a fixed period not exceeding six months (Article 2 subparag. 3(b), Article 21(2), and Article 57(1)2). According to the aforementioned provision of electronic financial supervision pursuant to the said delegation, a financial institution should establish and operate measures, such as prohibiting access to and operation of an external communications network (including radio communications networks), such as bypassing the said information protection system, at a terminal connected to an internal communication network (Article 22 subparag. 15(1) and 3).

As such, the Plaintiff, a financial institution under the former Electronic Financial Transactions Act, is obligated to install an information protection system, such as the instant system, to protect information, etc. from leakage, alteration, or damage of information in the information processing system or from impeding normal services in the information processing system. Thus, the Plaintiff’s establishment of the instant system is merely deemed to fall under the fulfillment of obligations

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.