2. All remaining claims of the Plaintiff are dismissed.

3. The costs of lawsuit shall be divided into five parts, and four parts shall be borne by the plaintiff, and the remainder by the defendant.

The portion exceeding KRW 94,426,317 of the imposition of global income tax for the year 200, the portion exceeding KRW 98,395,79 of the imposition of global income tax for the year 200, the portion exceeding KRW 98,395,79 of the imposition of global income tax for the year 200, the portion exceeding KRW 71,259,057 of the imposition of global income tax for the year 2001, and the portion exceeding KRW 72,484,259 of the imposition of global income tax for the year 202, and the portion exceeding KRW 72,526,729 of the imposition of global income tax for the year 202, and each of the Defendant has revoked the part of the imposition of global income tax for the year 2004.81 (the Plaintiff is clear that it is a clerical error in the imposition of global income tax for the year 2003, but this is revoked.

A. On September 25, 1984, the Plaintiff registered his/her business (business place: ○○○○○-dong ○○○○○○-dong ○○○, main business place: Mo○○-dong ○○○○○-dong ○○○-si ○○○-si ○○○○○-dong ○○○-dong : V, pp and bot products, metal products) with the trade name, and acquired the ownership of the land for factory and factory buildings (land 3,312.5 meters, land 1,404 meters, factory buildings 650.16 meters, 347.76 meters, 2,401.92 meters, hereinafter referred to as “real property of this case”) from the court and 1600,700 won, while running the automobile parts business.

B. After that, on January 15, 1997, the Plaintiff established ○ Industries Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “○○ Industries”) which is a place of business with the location of the real estate in this case, and takes office as a representative director at 40% of shares as a major shareholder, and from that time, ○ Industries is the ○ Industries.

The instant real estate was used without compensation.

C. On the other hand, around May 3, 2004, the ○○ Tax Office included the Plaintiff’s tax evasion report from an employee of ○ Industries, and confirmed that the Plaintiff acquired the instant real estate by auction and leased it without compensation to ○○ Industries, a person with a special relationship, and paid KRW 22,795,800 ( KRW 1 billion in 103,107,899 + KRW 76,724,691 + KRW 42,963,214 in 201 + KRW 76,724,691 in 200 + KRW 42,963,214 in 201) as necessary expenses for ○○ Business’s business income, and paid KRW 9,602,90 in ○○○ Labor’s personnel expense working for ○○ Industries.

D. The Defendant: (a) deemed that the Plaintiff leased the said real estate to ○○ Industries on a usual rent of KRW 200,000 and monthly rent of KRW 20,000,000 in accordance with the relevant calculation book for free lease of the said real estate; and (b) registered the Plaintiff as a real estate rental business operator ex officio on January 5, 1997 with the location of the instant real estate as the place of business and the opening date of business as the place of business; (c) excluded the Plaintiff’s real estate rental income calculated at the average rent from the necessary expenses of the ○○ enterprise; (d) denied the personnel expenses of ○○○; and (e) on July 5, 2004 or August 1, 2004, the Plaintiff imposed the global income tax amount stated in the “total Determination” as the global income tax amount for 197 through 203 years.

E. On September 6, 2004, the plaintiff appealed to the National Tax Tribunal on Sep. 6, 2004, which was dissatisfied with the above disposition by the defendant. On August 26, 2005, the International Tribunal rendered a decision of partial acceptance that deducts the amount calculated in accordance with the ratio of revenue amount of the ○ enterprise and the ○ industry to the transfer date from the date on which the ○○ was issued to the ○○ industry to the date on which the ○○ was issued to the ○○ industry to the ○○ industry by deducting the amount calculated in accordance with the ratio of revenue amount of the ○ enterprise and the ○ industry from the date on which the ○○○ was issued to the ○○ industry to the transfer date.

F. In accordance with the purport of the above decision of correction, the Defendant corrected the amount stated in the column of “total determined tax amount” in attached Form 1. Of global income tax as global income tax for 197 to 2003 as global income tax reduction and correction (hereinafter “the remainder of the disposition that remains revoked due to the correction of reduction and correction of the initial disposition” among the above dispositions) to the Plaintiff.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 and 2 evidence, Gap 9-1 to 7 evidence, Eul 1-6 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether each of the dispositions of this case is legitimate

A. The plaintiff's assertion

(1) Since part of the Plaintiff acquired the instant real estate and used it by himself and let ○ Industries use the remainder, the interest paid on the loan to acquire the said real estate is related to the Plaintiff’s business income, and thus, should be included in the necessary expenses for the Plaintiff’s business income.

Even if the above interest paid cannot be counted as necessary expenses in total as business income of the Plaintiff, among the real estate in this case, the proportion corresponding to the portion actually used by the Plaintiff among the real estate in this case (2,401,92m total of the factory buildings in this case, 28%, which is the percentage of square meters of square meters in possession of the Plaintiff) should be counted as necessary expenses for the Plaintiff’s business income. Nevertheless, each disposition of this case where the above interest paid is counted as necessary expenses in total in the real estate rental income

(2) The employee of the Plaintiff’s business chain, who is an employee of the Plaintiff’s business chain, was ordered to hold a concurrent office in the ○ Industries only on documents, and actually was in charge of production management at the ○○ enterprise. Nevertheless, each of the dispositions of this case on the premise that the ○○ was an employee of the ○○ enterprise and the ○○ industry was illegal.

(b) Related statutes;

2. Attached Table 2. It shall be as listed in relevant Acts and subordinate statutes;

C. Determination

(1) Determination as to the plaintiff's above A and Paragraph (1) argument

(A) In the calculation of real estate rental income amount, business income amount, etc., the amount to be included in the necessary expenses shall be based on the so-called profit-sharing principle (Article 27(1) of the Income Tax Act only hereinafter referred to as the "Act") that it shall be the sum of expenses corresponding to the total amount of income in the current year as usual accepted. Of the expenses disbursed by the businessman, the amount deemed not directly related to his business under the conditions as prescribed by the Presidential Decree is not included in the necessary expenses in the calculation of real estate rental income amount, business income amount, etc. (Article 33(1)13 of the Act). The interest paid by the businessman to acquire assets not related to his business is not acknowledged as direct related to his business (Article 7

In the meantime, in the case of concurrently running the business subject to reduction or exemption under the Act or other Acts, the common revenue amount and the common necessary expenses for the reduction or exemption business and other business shall be separately calculated under the conditions as prescribed by the Ordinance of the Ministry of Finance and Economy (Article 209(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Act), and the division of accounting under the Act and the Restriction of Special Taxation Act shall be made by classifying the total revenue amount and the necessary expenses by the separate account item for each business or revenue that should be classified under the relevant provisions (

(B) The following facts can be acknowledged in full view of the descriptions of Gap evidence 3-1 to 9, Gap evidence 4-1 to 5, Gap evidence 12-1 to 9, Gap evidence 18-23 (including paper numbers), Eul evidence 5 and 9, and the overall purport of the film and pleading, and there is no counter-proof.

① From January 1, 1997, the Plaintiff: (a) had ○ Industries used the remainder of the section for exclusive use (i.e., the first floor factory, the warehouse, U00f0293), excluding the second floor of a factory building; (b) had ○○ Enterprises (the Plaintiff’s business entity) use the second floor warehouse of a factory building; and (c) had ○○ Enterprises (the Plaintiff’s business entity) use the second floor warehouse of a factory building; and (d) had ○ Industries and ○○ Enterprises jointly use the remainder of the section for exclusive use (the first floor measurement room, stairs room, water level room, restaurant, the second floor office, the second floor office, the third floor room, the third floor room) excluding the above section for exclusive use.

② The area of the section for exclusive use (the second floor) used by ○○ Company is 319.5 square meters. The area of the section for exclusive use (the first floor, the height of the factory, the third floor) used by ○○ Industries is 1,083.69 square meters (1,058 square meters + 6.48 square meters + 18.81 square meters). The area of the section for exclusive use (the first floor measurement room, the water level room, the water level room, the second floor office, the second floor office, the second floor resting room, the third floor room), the area of the section for exclusive use used by ○○ Industries is 98,73 square meters in total (175.32 square meters + 17.1 square meters + 146.7m + 146.6m + 30.6m square meters + 107.73m + 222m square meters).

(C) As seen earlier, the Plaintiff acquired the instant real estate and most of it ○ Industries

The other (the second floor warehouse of a factory building) was used by the company (the company). Since the part of the real estate of this case used by the ○ Industries is an asset unrelated to the business of the ○○ Industries, the interest paid on the loan borrowed in order to acquire the part used by the ○ Industries is not directly related to the business of the ○ Industries, and the interest paid on the loan cannot be counted as necessary expenses for the plaintiff's business income.

Meanwhile, in the event that the Plaintiff concurrently operates a reduced or exempted business (○ enterprise) on the instant real estate and a real estate rental business (as a real estate rental business operator by the Defendant), the Plaintiff’s total revenue and necessary expenses for each business must be separately recorded by independent account, respectively, in the account book.

(i)The ○ Enterprise also uses part of the warehouse on the first floor for loading or unloading of products, depending on the circumstances, but its law does not specify certain boundaries.

Of the interest paid on borrowings for acquiring real estate of this case, the amount corresponding to the portion of the factory building used by ○○ Company shall be included in the Plaintiff’s business income as necessary expenses, and the amount corresponding to the portion of the factory building used by ○ Industries as necessary expenses.

나아가 원고의 사업소득에 필요경비로 산입할 지급이자액을 산정해보면, ○○기업이 사용한 공장건물 부분은 전유부분 319.5m² 및 공유부분 227.4m²2) 합계 546.7m²로서 공장건물 전체 면적 2,401.92m² 대비 약 22.77%(546.7m²/2,401.92m²X100)에 해당하므로, 이 사건 부동산 취득을 위한 차입금의 지급이자 합계 222,795,800원(1999년지급이자 103,107,895원 + 2000년 지급이자 76,724,691원+2001년 지급이자 42,963,214원)중 약 22,77%에 해당하는 50,730,602원{1999년 지급이자 중 23,477,667원(103,107,895원 X 22.77%), 2000년 지급이자 중 17,470,212,원(76,724,691원 X 22.77%), 2001년 지급이자 중 9,782,723원(42,963,214원 X 22.77%)}은 ○○기업 사업소득에 필요경비로 산입되어야 하고, 나머지 지급이자는 부동산임대소득에 필요경비로 산입되어야 한다.

Therefore, the plaintiff's above assertion is justified within the above recognition law, and the remainder is without merit.

(2) Judgment on the Plaintiff’s assertion of the above A. (2)

(A) The following facts can be acknowledged in light of the overall purport of Gap evidence 6-1-9, Gap evidence 7-12, Gap evidence 8-12, Eul evidence 1-3, Eul evidence 1-3, and all the arguments. Contrary to this, Gap evidence 13,14, 15, and 16-1 and 2 are difficult to believe, and there is no other evidence to reverse the evidence.

① From January 17, 2002, the Plaintiff issued a personnel order ordering ○○ who had worked for ○○ Company from around 1993 to serve as an executive director in ○○ Company and ○ Industries, and issued a personnel order to serve only in ○ Industries as an executive director on August 1, 2004. However, even after issuing an additional executive director, the Plaintiff paid ○○’s salary in ○○ Company.

② ○○ had a role in managing and supervising the employees of ○○ Industries and the employees of ○○ Industries.

③ On May 25, 2004, the Plaintiff’s name on May 25, 2004

(ii)the area calculated by multiplying the area of the co-owned part 998.73m with the ○ enterprise multiplied by the ratio of the portion of exclusive ownership of the ○ enterprise to the area of the entire section of exclusive ownership [the area of the 998.73m square X 319.5m square + 1,083.69m square meters];

I prepared a certificate (No. 3) to the effect that ○ enterprise, the representative of which is an individual, pays the unpaid benefit at ○○ enterprise.

(B) According to the above facts, on January 17, 2002, 100, ○○ is a person working in ○ Industries from the date of receiving an order of concurrent appointment as executive director from the date of receiving an order of appointment as ○○ and ○ Industries to the date of receiving an order of work in ○ Industries, or working as executive director at least from ○ Industries and ○○ Industries to the date of receiving an order of work in ○○ Industries. Thus, the Plaintiff’s assertion on this part is without merit.

(d) Justifiable tax amount.

Therefore, with respect to the reasonable global income tax to be paid by the Plaintiff in the business year 199 through 2003, 50,730,602 won (23,477,667 among the interest paid in 199, 17,470,212 out of the interest paid in 200, and 9,782,72,723 out of the interest paid in 2001 among the interest paid in 200, 17,470,212 out of the interest paid in 200) among the interest paid in the loan for acquiring real estate of this case included in the expenses for the Plaintiff’s real estate rental income shall be included in the business income of the ○○ enterprise. If the remainder of the interest paid in the business year 1999 through 203 is included in the necessary expenses for the real estate rental income, the legitimate amount of global income tax for each business year

E. Sub-committee

Therefore, the portion exceeding 15,947,470 won out of the disposition of imposition of global income tax of 173,453,551 for the year 1999, the portion exceeding 135,389,595 won among the disposition of imposition of global income tax of 147,142,951 for the year 200, and the portion exceeding 88,823,776 won among the disposition of imposition of global income tax of 94,925,759 for the year 2001 is unlawful. The plaintiff's assertion pointing this out within the scope of the above recognition is with merit.

3. Conclusion

Thus, each of the claims of this case is justified within the above scope of recognition, and the remaining claims are without merit, and they are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.

2. Related statutes;

○ Calculation of necessary expenses under Article 27 of the Income Tax Act

(1) In calculating real estate rental income, business income, temporary property income, other income, or forest income, the amount to be included in necessary expenses shall be the sum of expenses corresponding to the total amount of income in the current year, which is generally accepted.

(2) The expenses corresponding to the gross amount of incomes before the current year, which are not appropriated as the necessary expenses prior to the current year, shall be considered the necessary expenses.

(3) Necessary matters for the calculation of necessary expenses shall be prescribed by Presidential Decree.

○ Not to include necessary expenses in Article 33 of the Income Tax Act

(1) Of the amounts paid or to be paid by a resident in the current year, the following provisions shall not be included in necessary expenses in the calculation of real estate rental income, business income, temporary property income, other income, or forestry income:

13. The amount deemed not directly related to business among expenses disbursed in each year under the conditions as prescribed by the Presidential Decree; and

(3) Matters necessary for the exclusion from necessary expenses under paragraph (1) shall be prescribed by Presidential Decree.

Article 55 (Calculation of Necessary Expenses for Real Estate Rental Income, etc.)

(1) Necessary expenses corresponding to the total amount of income from real estate rental and business income in each year shall be as follows:

1. Purchase price (excluding a purchase reduction or a purchase discount) of the raw materials for the commodities or products sold and the incidental expenses thereto, and in this case, the original purchase price and incidental expenses thereto shall be applicable, if the relevant business operator has consumed such ones for a business use, as have been purchased for other purposes;

6. The salaries of the employee;

13. Interest paid on the debt used directly for gaining the gross amount of income;

○ Expenditure not related to Article 78 of the Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act

"The amount deemed not directly related to the business" in Article 33 (1) 13 of the Act means the amount falling under any of the following subparagraphs:

3. Interest paid on the amount borrowed by a business operator to acquire assets not related to such business.

Article 209 of the Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act: Calculation of Common Profit and Loss

(1) Where a business which is reduced or exempted under Article 13 (1) or other Acts is concurrently operated, common necessary expenses and common revenue amount for reduction and exemption projects and other projects shall be calculated separately under the conditions as prescribed by the Ordinance of the Ministry of Finance and Economy

(2) In keeping separate accounting under Article 161 of the Act, the method of separate calculation of assets, liabilities, and profits and losses shall be prescribed by the Ordinance of the Ministry of Finance and Economy.

○ Calculation and Separate Accounting of Article 96 of the Enforcement Rule of the Income Tax Act

(1) Where a person concurrently operates a business, the income tax of which is reduced or exempted pursuant to the Act and the Restriction of Special Taxation Act (hereafter referred to as the "Special Taxation Act" in this Article) and other businesses as provided for in Article 3 (1) of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act, the reduction or exemption business and the common income amount of other businesses and the common necessary expenses for the other businesses shall be separately calculated in accordance with the standards in the following subparagraphs: Provided, That where there is no individual necessary expenses (referring to the total amount of necessary expenses other than common necessary expenses; hereafter the same shall apply in this Article) or it is impossible or unreasonable to apply the provisions of the following subparagraphs due to other reasons, it shall

2. In case where the reduction and exemption business and other business types are identical, the common necessary expenses shall be calculated in proportion to the total income amount of the business concerned.

3. Where the business type of reduction and exemption is not the same, the common necessary expenses shall be calculated in proportion to the necessary expenses for the reduction and exemption business and other individual business.

(2) The classification of accounting by the Act and the Restriction of Special Taxation Act shall be made by classifying the gross income and necessary expenses by the business or revenue, which shall be classified pursuant to the relevant provisions, by the separate account subject on the account books: Provided, That it shall be common to each business or revenue.

Total income amount and necessary expenses shall not be included.