유상증자 주식을 특수관계자가 인수하고 납입주금으로 특수관계자 채무를 상환시 부당행위대상 여부[국패]
Seoul High Court 2008Nu33169 (Law No. 11, 2009)
Seoul Administrative Court 2008Guhap20376 ( October 17, 2008)
Whether it is subject to unfair practices when a person with a special relationship receives shares for subscription and redeems debts with a specially related party with the subscription money.
Even if all of the non-party companies acquired shares issued by the Plaintiff in excess of their face value, it is not reasonable to deem that the non-party company gave any benefit to the non-party company, and the act of repaying the loan with the paid share price also extinguished the Plaintiff's obligation. Therefore, the provision of wrongful calculation
The contents of the decision shall be the same as attached.
Revocation of a disposition, etc. imposing corporate tax, 209Du11270
AAA Construction Corporation
Head of the District Tax Office
The Seoul High Court Decision 2008Nu33169 Decided June 11, 2009
December 23, 2010
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.
The grounds of appeal are examined.
Comprehensively taking account of the facts acknowledged by the court below and the evidence duly admitted by the court below, CCF Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'Plaintiffs') issued KRW 5,400 per share of KRW 5,000 (hereinafter referred to as 'new shares') with KRW 70,000 and KRW 2,700 per share of KRW 70,00,000 and KRW 2,70,000 and KRW 30,00 of the Plaintiff's outstanding shares and KRW 70,000 were 10,000,000 and KRW 2,70,000 were 70,000,000 were 0,000 and 70,000,000 won were 2,000,000,000 won were 70,000,000 won were 0,000 won were 10,000,000 won were 20.
The issue of inclusion of the issue amount above the face value of the new shares of this case against the plaintiff is not whether the non-party company is a wrongful calculation and is separately determined pursuant to the provisions of the Corporate Tax Act. Since Article 17 subparagraph 1 of the former Corporate Tax Act (amended by Act No. 7838 of Dec. 31, 2005) provides that the issue amount above the face value of the new shares shall not be included in gross income, it shall not be included in gross income for the plaintiff.
The judgment below to the same purport is just and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to wrongful calculation, etc. as alleged in the grounds of appeal.
Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.
L2-2-2-2-2-2-2-2-2(2)-2-2(2)-2-4(2)-2-2
Justices Lee Jama-amam-amam-am-am-am-am-am-am-am-am-am-am-am-am-am-am-am-am-am.
Justices Kim G-am-am-am-am-am-am-am-am-am-am-am-am-am-am-am-am-am-am-am-am-am-am.
Justices Min Il-am-am-am-am-am-am-am-am-am-am-am-am-am-am-am-am-am-am-am-am-am.