The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

Article 21 (1) 17 of the former Income Tax Act (amended by Act No. 9897, Dec. 31, 2009; hereinafter the same) provides that “compensation” as one of other income means money and valuables paid to the purport of a case in connection with administration of affairs or provision of services, etc., and whether it constitutes such money and valuables should be determined by comprehensively taking into account the motive and purpose of receiving the money and valuables, relationship with the other party, amount, etc.

(2) Article 21 (1) 17 of the former Income Tax Act provides that “The head of a Si/Gun/Gu shall pay compensation for mental distress,” and Article 21 (1) 17 of the same Act provides that “the head of a Si/Gun/Gu shall pay compensation for mental distress,” and Article 21 (1) 17 of the same Act provides that “the head of a Si/Gun/Gu shall pay compensation for mental distress,” and Article 21 (1) 17 of the same Act provides that “the head of a Si/Gun/Gu shall pay compensation for mental distress,” and the head of a Si/Gun/Gu shall pay compensation for mental distress.”

Examining the reasoning of the first instance judgment cited by the lower court in light of the records, including the evidence duly admitted, the lower court’s aforementioned determination is based on the legal doctrine as seen earlier. In so doing, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by abusing the right to command the lawsuit, infringing the Plaintiff’s right to pleading in violation of the principle of oral deliberation, exceeding the judgment on the honorarium subject to income tax, misunderstanding the probative value of the criminal judgment, or exceeding the bounds of the principle

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party.