종합소득세부과처분취소
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The first instance court.
1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as follows: (a) adding the same content as Paragraph (2) to the 12th page 17 of the judgment of the court of first instance; and (b) excluding the rejection of evidence Nos. 16-1 and 2, which is insufficient to recognize the plaintiff's assertion, as additional evidence submitted at the court of first instance, are the same as the part of the judgment of the court of first instance; and (c) thus, it is acceptable in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence
2. The additional part argues that “The Plaintiff’s existence or absence of justifiable cause with respect to the penalty tax for failure to report and the penalty tax for failure to report ought to be determined at the same time, so it is unlawful for the Defendant to impose penalty tax for failure to report even if it recognizes that there exists a justifiable reason not to impose penalty for failure to report is illegal. The reason for imposition or exemption (justifiable reason) cannot be deemed to be the same. The penalty tax for failure to report and the penalty tax for failure to report are deemed to have received financial benefits for the amount that the taxpayer has failed to pay by the due date of return, and has the nature of administrative sanctions imposed on the violation of the obligation for payment (see Supreme Court Decision 2008Du8505,8512, Jan. 28, 2010). Therefore, it is not unlawful for the Defendant to impose penalty tax for failure to report even though it did not impose penalty for failure to report due to differences in the interpretation.” Therefore, the Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit.
3. In conclusion, the judgment of the first instance is legitimate, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.