[종합소득세등부과처분취소][공1983.2.15.(698),294]
Whether the recognized bonus for the representative of a corporation is included in the taxable income of global income tax (affirmative)
The amount of bonus treated as bonus for the representative of a corporation under the provisions of Article 33(5) of the former Corporate Tax Act (Act No. 2521, Mar. 3, 1973; Act No. 2566, Nov. 29, 1967; Act No. 2565, Mar. 3, 1973) and Article 94 of the Enforcement Decree of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act shall be deemed as bonus and salary similar to bonus under Article 4(4) of the former Income Tax Act (Act No. 1966, Nov. 29, 1967; Act No. 2565, Mar. 3, 1973); therefore, in calculating the global income tax amount on the representative
Article 33(5) of the former Corporate Tax Act (Act No. 2521, Mar. 3, 1973); Article 94 of the Enforcement Decree of the Corporate Tax Act; Article 4 of the former Income Tax Act (Act No. 1966, Nov. 29, 1967; Act No. 2565, Mar. 3, 197); Article 15 of the Income Tax Act
Park Literacy Award
Seoul Madylology Head of tax office
Seoul High Court Decision 81Gu680 delivered on June 2, 1982
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.
The grounds of appeal are examined.
Article 33(5) of the Corporate Tax Act (Law No. 2521, Feb. 16, 1973; Act No. 2566, Mar. 3, 1973) which was enforced at the time of the instant case, as bonus for a representative of a corporation pursuant to Article 94 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, shall be deemed as bonus in the nature similar to bonus under Article 1966 of the former Income Tax Act (Act No. 1966, Mar. 3, 1973; Act No. 2565, Mar. 3, 1973) and Article 4 subparag. 4 of the former Income Tax Act (Act No. 25666), which was effective at the time of the instant case. Therefore, the lower court’s determination that the Defendant included the recognized bonus for the representative in taxable income in calculating the global income tax amount of the Plaintiff at the time of the original decision is justifiable, and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to taxable income as to taxable income as stated in the grounds for appeal.
Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.
Justices Jeong Tae-tae (Presiding Justice)