종합소득세등부과처분취소
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 judgment of the court of first instance is reasonable, and thus, it is cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
(다만, 제1심 판결문 제6쪽 중 제12행과 제20∽21행의 각 “소득세법 제21조 제1항 제7호” 부분은 각 “소득세법 제21조 제1항 제17호”의 잘못된 기재로 보인다). 2. 원고는 항소심에서도, 원고와 B 사이에 작성된 동업청산 합의서와 원고가 항소심에서 추가로 제출한 확인서 등에 의하면, 원고가 이 사건 합의에 따라 B으로부터 지급받은 돈은 원고가 개발한 봉제완구의 디자인과 패턴을 B 측이 원고와의 동업관계 청산 후에도 계속 사용하는 것 등에 대가로 지급받은 것이라고 할 것임에도, 그와 달리 원고가 B으로부터 지급받은 돈을 단순히 사례금이라고 본 이 사건 처분은 위법하다고 거듭 주장한다.
According to the instant agreement (Evidence No. 2-1) made between the Plaintiff and B, the Plaintiff merely indicated “price for the liquidation of business operation” with respect to the money agreed to be paid from B (see, e.g., records 28 pages), and did not state that the Plaintiff would be paid as compensation for the design pattern, etc. developed by the Plaintiff as alleged by the Plaintiff. In addition, in the first instance trial, the money paid to the Plaintiff is merely a consolation money for the Plaintiff’s work with the company that the Plaintiff operated with the Plaintiff through the liquidation of business operation, and it is evident that the money paid to the Plaintiff was not a compensation for the design, etc. developed by the Plaintiff. As alleged by the Plaintiff, the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff, such as the statement of Evidence No. 7-9, which was submitted additionally by the Plaintiff at the appellate trial, cannot be concluded as false, and there is no objective material to recognize that the said testimony was false. < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 20680, Feb. 2, 2008>