차명계좌로 입금한 금액 전부가 원고로부터 매입한 석유류 매입대금에 해당함을 확인할 만한 자료가 없음[국패]
Seoul Administrative Court 201Guhap1733, 16 September 2011)
early 2009west4090 ( October 06, 2010)
There is no evidence to verify that all the amount deposited into the borrowed account falls under the purchase price of petroleum purchased from the plaintiff.
It is not sufficient to acknowledge that all the amount deposited into the borrowed account falls under the purchase price of petroleum purchased from the plaintiff, and there is no objective data to verify that there is no objective data to verify that the amount of the purchase price of petroleum purchased from the plaintiff, and in the case corresponding to the amount of the processing tax invoice issued, the omitted income is 0.0
2011Nu34421 Revocation of disposition of imposing corporate tax, etc.
XX Co., Ltd
The head of Yangcheon Tax Office
Seoul Administrative Court Decision 201Guhap1733 decided September 16, 2011
March 23, 2012
May 11, 2012
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
1. Purport of claim
"A notice of change in the amount of bonus income of 000 won (hereinafter referred to as "the notice of change in the amount of income of this case") issued by the defendant against Park Park on August 21, 2009 (hereinafter referred to as "the notice of change in the amount of income of this case") shall be revoked. The defendant's disposition of imposing corporate tax of 000 won (hereinafter referred to as "the disposition of this case") for the plaintiff on August 21, 2009, shall be revoked."
The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance shall be revoked, and the plaintiff's claim corresponding to the revoked part shall be dismissed.
1. Scope of the judgment of this court;
In the first instance court, the Plaintiff sought the notice of change in the amount of income of this case and the revocation of the disposition of this case, and the first instance court dismissed the lawsuit on the claim for revocation of the notice of change in the amount of income of this case, and accepted the part on the claim for revocation of the disposition of this case, and appealed only against the Defendant. Accordingly, the subject of the judgment of this
2. Details of the disposition;
A. The Plaintiff is a company established on January 6, 2006 and closed its business on November 20, 2006, and the Director of the Central District Tax Office conducted an investigation of suspected facts on the data against the Plaintiff from June 8, 2006 to November 22, 2006, and notified the Defendant of the purchase of petroleum from the Plaintiff during the first taxable period of 2006 and the transfer of the price of KRW 00 (hereinafter referred to as the “instant payment”) to the Plaintiff’s deposit account and the name deposit account or cash payment. The details of the instant payment are as follows; the Defendant, from November 20, 2006 to November 31, 207, conducted an investigation of the Plaintiff’s value-added tax on the processed tax invoice (the price of KRW 100,000,000, 200, 200, 2006, 2006, 2006, 2006, 206, 2006, 7.
C. The Defendant calculated the Plaintiff’s estimated income amount at KRW 00 by applying standard expense rate under Article 104(2) of the Corporate Tax Act with respect to the omitted amount in the sales declaration stated in the preceding paragraph, and issued the instant disposition to correct and notify the Plaintiff of KRW 000 of the corporate tax for the year 2006.
D. The Plaintiff appealed and filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal on November 18, 2009, but was dismissed on October 6, 2010.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, 6 through 9, 13, and 14 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings
3. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The plaintiff's assertion
"이 사건 처분은 XX의 대표자 박BB의 진술서를 근거로 원고가 권CC, 김DD, 김EE, 김FF, OO 주식회사, 윤GG, 이HH, 이KK, 이LL, 전MM, 정OO, 최PP, 하QQ 명의의 차명계좌(이하이 사건 차명계좌'라 한다)로 석유류 판매대금을 송금 받았음에도 이를 선고 누락하였음을 전제로 한 것이나, 이 사건 차명계좌는 원고의 차명계좌가 아니므로 피고의 이 사건 처분은 위법하다",나. 관계법령
It is as shown in the attached Form.
C. Determination
In light of the above legal principles, the Plaintiff’s 2-3-1 through 3, 4, and 5-2 as evidence indicating that the instant amount of payment was paid from XX to the Plaintiff. However, the Plaintiff’s 2-1-2, 3-1, 4, and 5-2-2-2-2-2-2-3-2-3-2-2-3-2-2-3-2-3-2-2-3-2-2-3-2-3-2-2-3-2-3-2-2-3-2-3-2-2-3-2-3-2-2-3-2-3-2-4-2-3-2-3-2-4-2-3-2-3-2-4-2-4-2-3-2-3-2-3-2-4-2-3-2-3-3-2-4-2-3-2-3-2-3-2-3-2-3-3-3-3-3-4-3-4-2-2-3-2-3-3-2-3-3-3-2-3-3-3-3-3-2-3-3-
In the case of the portion corresponding to KRW 00,00, which is the amount issued by the Plaintiff of the instant payment, the instant disposition was deemed as the income on which only the difference between the instant payment amount and the said KRW 00 was omitted on the premise that it was included in the Plaintiff’s income at the corporate tax return in 2006, and as long as the portion deemed to have accrued to the Plaintiff of the instant payment is merely 000 won and does not exceed the said KRW 00, the income omitted from which the return was filed may lead to the conclusion that it is KRW 0
Therefore, the Defendant’s disposition in this case, based on the premise that the Plaintiff was omitted from sentencing even if the Plaintiff received a transfer of petroleum sales proceeds from O via the instant borrowed account, was unlawful.
4. Conclusion
Therefore, the part of the plaintiff's claim for the revocation of the disposition of this case is justified. The judgment of the court of first instance on the part of the claim for revocation of the disposition of this case is just. Thus, the defendant's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.