원고가 이 사건 법인에서 받은 소득의 귀속시기 및 근로소득인지, 기타소득인지 여부[국승]
Jeju District Court 2015Guhap560 (No. 13, 2017)
Whether the Plaintiff’s income received from the corporation of this case is the time of attribution, earned income, or other income
In determining the period of attribution of income under the Income Tax Act, the period of attribution shall be determined on the basis of whether it has been mature and confirmed to the extent that the possibility of realizing the income is considerably high, considering the management and control of income, the degree of the objective of income generated, and the timing of securing the taxpayer's money. Since the Plaintiff received the income of this case as the adjustment of income, it is reasonable to deem
Article 20 of the Income Tax Act, Article 21 of the Income Tax Act
Gwangju High Court ( Jeju) 2017Nu1799 ( April 25, 2018)
AA, BB
○ Head of tax office
Jeju District Court 2015Guhap560 (No. 13, 2017)
on October 28, 2018
on April 25, 2018
1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed. 2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.
The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked. The defendant's rejection disposition against plaintiff A is revoked as KRW 241,814,886 of the aggregate income tax for the year 2012 for the plaintiff AA on October 28, 2014; KRW 230,789,060 of the global income tax for the year 2012 for plaintiff BB on December 4, 2014; and KRW 230,789,060 of the global income tax for the year 2012 for the plaintiff BB is revoked.
1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;
The reasoning for this Court's explanation is that the first instance court's decision is identical to that of "CCC", except that the first instance court's judgment "the defendant's "the second instance court's "the second instance court's "the second instance court's "the construction director of a golf course", "the business general" "the construction director of a golf course" in the 8th instance court's "the design and planning management of a golf course, construction fund general affairs", and "the construction fund general affairs". Thus, it is cited as it is in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act,
2. Conclusion
Therefore, the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed due to the lack of reason, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the plaintiffs' appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.