beta
(영문) 대법원 2017. 11. 23. 선고 2017두56155 판결

매월 정해진 금액으로 지급받는 여비 명목의 월액여비가 실비변상적 성질의 급여에 해당하지 아니한다.[국승]

Case Number of the immediately preceding lawsuit

Seoul High Court-2017Nu32502 ( dated 14, 2017)

Case Number of the previous trial

Cho Jae-2015-China-576 ( October 28, 2016)

Title

Monthly travel expenses paid in the name of travel expenses paid monthly shall not be paid in the nature of reimbursement for actual expenses.

Summary

Since it is difficult to view that monthly travel expenses of this case were paid by estimatinging the cost for compensating for actual expenses, and it is difficult to recognize that the expenses were calculated based on the required expenses, the monthly travel expenses of this case cannot be deemed as benefits for compensating for actual expenses, and

Related statutes

Article 20 of the Income Tax Act on Non-Taxable Income

Cases

Supreme Court-2017-Du-56155 ( November 23, 2017)

Plaintiff

이@@외

Defendant

o Other than the Director of the Tax Office

Imposition of Judgment

November 23, 2017

Text

All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

All of the judgment of the court below and the records of this case were examined, but the appellant's grounds of appeal are not included in the grounds provided by each subparagraph of Article 4 (1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure of Appeal or are recognized to be groundless. Thus, all of the appeals are dismissed pursuant to Article 5 of the same Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent

November 23, 2017