경정청구거부처분취소
The judgment below
The part against the plaintiff is reversed, and that part of the case is remanded to the Seoul High Court.
The defendant.
The grounds of appeal are examined.
1. On the grounds of appeal by the Defendant, the lower court acknowledged facts as indicated in its reasoning based on evidence, and determined that the amount of preservation of the instant case, which the Plaintiff paid upon the exercise of the stock option by the executives and employees, falls under Article 19(1) and (3) of the former Corporate Tax Act (amended by Act No. 9267, Dec. 26, 2008; hereinafter the same shall apply) and Article 19 subparag. 3 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Corporate Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 21301, Feb. 4, 2009; hereinafter the same shall apply) and
Examining the record in light of the relevant provisions and legal principles, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misapprehending the legal doctrine as to inclusion in deductible expenses under the Corporate Tax Act, failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, or by failing
2. Plaintiff’s ground of appeal
A. The lower court acknowledged the following facts in full view of the evidence.
1) A new financial holding company (hereinafter “new financial holding company”) is deemed a new financial holding company.
The Plaintiff, a subsidiary of the Plaintiff, granted the instant stock option to its executives and employees from May 2002 to March 2006 by way of settling the difference between the Plaintiff’s new financial branch shares. Meanwhile, when executives and employees exercise the stock option, the Plaintiff paid the difference settlement expenses to its executives and employees to the new financial branch owner. (2) The Plaintiff recognized the instant stock option expenses to be paid to the new financial branch owner from May 2002 to 2006 as stock compensation expenses (long-term payable expenses) in accordance with corporate accounting standards. However, in calculating the corporate tax base, the Plaintiff did not include them in the calculation of the corporate tax base, but made tax adjustment as non-deductible expenses.
3. When part of the stock options of this case were exercised during 2007, the Plaintiff paid KRW 1,432,580,821 to the officers and employees who exercised the stock options in 2007.