가공매입에 따른 사외유출 금액을 사내유보로 처리하기 위한 요건[국승]
Seoul Administrative Court 2009Guhap51933 ( August 13, 2010)
Seocho 208west 4076 ( October 20, 2009)
Requirements for handling the amount of outflow from the company due to processing purchase as internal reserve;
If the amount of the outflow from the company is to be treated as an internal reserve under the above Enforcement Decree, it is not sufficient to recover the amount of the outflow from the company before knowing that there is a correction, and it is reasonable to view that such collected amount should be included in the gross income as tax adjustment
2010Nu28429 and revocation of detailed employment income and revocation thereof.
○○ Co., Ltd.
○ Head of tax office
Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2009Guhap51933 decided August 13, 2010
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked. The defendant's disposition of imposition of KRW 318,336.10 on June 12, 2008 against the plaintiff shall be revoked.
1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;
The reasoning for the court’s explanation concerning this case is that it is difficult to evaluate that this case is included in the profit of the court of first instance pursuant to Section 14 of the judgment of the court of first instance, and the following additional contents are the same as the part of the reasoning of the court of first instance, and therefore, they are cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. The addition;
In addition, Article 4 (4) (main sentence) of the Enforcement Decree of the Corporate Tax Act provides that "In addition, if a domestic corporation fully satisfies the three requirements that "the amount of outflow from the company is recovered within the period for filing a revised return under Article 45 of the Framework Act on National Taxes", "the amount of outflow from the company is included in gross income in the tax adjustment", it shall be disposed of as retained earnings. The proviso provides that "the amount of outflow from the company is not disposed of as retained earnings when it is aware that the tax investigation was notified or that the tax investigation was commenced," and the proviso provides that "the amount of outflow from the company should not be disposed of as retained earnings." Since the above proviso provides that "if the domestic corporation becomes aware that the correction was made before it satisfies all the above requirements, it shall be deemed reasonable in a systematic interpretation of the text that "the amount of outflow from the company can not be disposed of as retained earnings," if the domestic corporation is not included in gross income within the period for filing a revised return but must be disposed of as retained earnings, it shall not apply to the above provisions that should be recovered from the outflow from the company.
3. Conclusion
Therefore, the judgment of the first instance court is legitimate, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.