[법인세부과처분취소청구사건][고집1974특,588]
The purport of Article 8 of the former Corporate Tax Act and Article 9 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act that requires the deduction of non-taxable income for each business year.
In calculating the tax base of the corporate income for each business year under Article 8 of the Corporate Tax Act and Article 9 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, the provisions that require the deduction of non-taxable income for each business year is to only the non-taxable income for the relevant business year from among the income of the corporation for the business year of the relevant business year, and the non-taxable income for the previous year should not be taxed in the relevant business year, and the non-taxable income for the previous year should not be carried over and deducted from the income. Therefore, the measures that the defendant did not transfer the non-taxable income for the
Article 8 of the Corporate Tax Act, Article 9 of the Enforcement Decree
Supreme Court Decision 73Nu112 delivered on August 31, 1973
E Launchton Mocophd Republic of Korea
Head of Seodaemun Tax Office
The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.
The disposition imposing corporate tax of KRW 9,437,892 on the plaintiff on November 13, 1973 by the defendant shall be revoked. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant.
(1) On November 13, 1973, the Defendant imposed corporate tax amount of KRW 9,862,297 for the business year (from January 1, 1972 to December 31, 1972; hereinafter referred to as the “business year”) on the Plaintiff on the 72th business year (from January 1, 1972 to December 31, 1972) and thereafter, among the tax base amount, there is no dispute between the parties as to the fact that the Plaintiff decided to refund the amount of KRW 2,912,00,00, which the Plaintiff paid to the building owner for the lease of the Plaintiff’s office, was proved as the office deposit, and as to the above amount of KRW 586,428, and the amount of gross income at KRW 586,
(2) No dispute over the establishment of the Association shall be deemed as follows: (a) 1-1 (Report on Calculation of Profit and Loss); (b) 3-1-2 (Report on Calculation of Profit and Loss); (c) 2-1-2 (Report on Calculation of Profit and Loss; (d) 3-1-4; (e) 4-2 (Report on Calculation of Profit and Loss); (d) 7-1-4; (e) 5-3 (Report on Calculation of Profit and Loss); (f) 7-4; (f) 4-1-7; (f) 5-1-7; (f) 7-1-6-4; (f) 5-2-1-7; (f) 5-14-1-7; (f) 5-14-7; and (f) 5-2-14-7; and (f) 5-2-14-7; and (f) 75-2-14-27; and
(3) The plaintiff's attorney stated that the amount of losses carried over in the above business year should not be deducted from the amount of non-taxable income in each business year's tax base, and that the amount of 69 business year's 12,608,952, 70 business year's 5,782,938,657, and 71 business year's 27,330,540, the amount of 1,587,764 should be deducted from the amount of losses carried over, and the remaining amount of 25,742,76 won should be deducted from the amount of losses carried over in the previous business year's 29 business year's 29 years' 79 years' 79 years' 209,000,000 won should be deducted from the amount of losses carried over in the previous business year's 30 years' 97,000 won' 97,000 won should be deducted from the amount of losses carried over in each business year's 97.
(4) Therefore, we examine whether non-taxable income not deducted from each business year can be viewed as losses carried forward.
In calculating the tax base for corporate income for each business year under Article 8 of the Corporate Tax Act and Article 9 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, the provision that requires the deduction of non-taxable income for each business year is to only the non-taxable income for the current year from among the income of a corporation for the business year. In addition, the income recognized as non-taxable income in the previous business year is not taxed in the current business year, and the non-taxable income for the previous business year is carried over, and this shall not be deducted from the income. Therefore, the defendant's measure that did not dispose of non-taxable income for the previous
(5) Thus, the defendant's objection disposition against the plaintiff is legitimate. Thus, the plaintiff's objection claim for revocation is dismissed without merit, and the costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiff who has lost. It is so decided as per Disposition.
Judges Han Man-Shan (Presiding Judge)