beta
(영문) 대법원 2017. 06. 15. 선고 2017두37277 판결

(심리불속행) 차명계좌 입금액은 매출누락으로 추정됨[국승]

Case Number of the immediately preceding lawsuit

Daejeon High Court (Cheongju)-2015-Nu 11449 ( October 18, 2011),

Title

(A) The entry amount of the borrowed account shall be presumed to be an omission in sales.

Summary

(Abstract of the original trial) No evidence of the certificate of omission in sales may be easily denied only when the investigation is conducted, and the claimant shall prove that the amount of the borrowed account is not the amount of omission in sales.

Related statutes

Article 67 of the Corporate Tax Act

Cases

2017Du37277 Revocation of Disposition of Imposing corporate tax, etc.

Plaintiff-Appellant

OO

Defendant-Appellee

O Head of tax office

Judgment of the lower court

Daejeon High Court (Cheongju)-2015-Nu 11449 ( October 18, 2017),

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

Reasons

All of the records of this case and the judgment of the court below and the grounds of appeal were examined, but it is clear that the assertion on the grounds of appeal by the appellant constitutes Article 4 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure for Appeal and therefore, the appeal is dismissed under Article 5 of the above Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by