종합소득세등부과처분취소
1. The part of the instant lawsuit regarding the disposition of imposition in 2011 shall be dismissed.
2. The plaintiff's remaining claims.
1. On April 3, 2014, the Defendant issued a revised notice of the Plaintiff on April 3, 2014, of global income tax of 752,584, global income tax of 2006, global income tax of 5,596,090, global income tax of 2007, global income tax of 5,364,040, global income tax of 2008, global income tax of 336,350, global income tax of 209, global income tax of 336,350, global income tax of 3,135,700, global income tax of 2010, global income tax of 3,719,490, global income tax of 2011.
(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). / [Grounds for recognition] without dispute, Gap evidence 6, Eul evidence 1 (including paper numbers, hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings.
2. According to the Defendant’s written evidence No. 6 on the Defendant’s defense prior to the merits, the Plaintiff can only recognize the fact that the Tax Tribunal filed a request for a judgment on the imposition of global income tax from 2006 to 2010, and there is no evidence to acknowledge that the Plaintiff had undergone the prior trial procedure, such as filing a request for a judgment with the Tax Tribunal on the imposition of global income tax in 201
(Article 56(2) of the Framework Act on National Taxes. Accordingly, the part seeking revocation of the disposition imposing global income tax in 201 among the instant lawsuit shall be dismissed as unlawful.
3. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) On November 14, 2007, the Plaintiff used for the business after borrowing KRW 300 million in its own name as collateral and borrowing KRW 300 million in its own name. As such, the interest on the loan should be deducted from the revenue amount. 2) Since the Plaintiff failed to recover KRW 120 million from 206 to 2008,000 that it lent to C from 2008, the interest on the loan should be deducted from the revenue amount.
(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes;
C. 1) The Plaintiff received a loan of KRW 300 million from a new bank (Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Gwanak-gu, 103 Dong 703, 703) on November 14, 2007, by offering its own real estate (Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Gwanak-gu 103 Dong 703) as security in addition to the purport of the entire pleadings as to the claim of deduction of interest related to the loan (hereinafter “instant loan”).