법인세부과처분취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. From October 7, 201 to September 12, 2013, the Plaintiff: (a) determined USD 7,000,000 as interest rate of USD 5,000 to the OPH (hereinafter “OPH”); (b) from around October 7, 201 to around September 12, 2013, the Plaintiff leased the instant loan (hereinafter “instant loan”).
B. After conducting a follow-up inspection of the Plaintiff’s overseas local corporation’s loan investment, etc., the director of the Central District Tax Office deemed the instant loan to be a provisional payment unrelated to the business that was paid to the specially related person, and notified the Defendant of the result of the inspection, the Defendant issued a notice of correction of KRW 69,685,240 for the business year 2013 to the Plaintiff on October 2, 2015, after adding the amount of KRW 293,437,634 for the business year 2014 to deductible expenses, and the Defendant issued a notice of correction and notification of KRW 67,686,200 for the business year 2014 to the Plaintiff on October 1, 2015.
(hereinafter referred to as “instant disposition” in total, of the above correction and notification of each corporate tax.
On April 25, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an objection against the instant disposition and filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal. However, the Tax Tribunal dismissed the appeal on July 26, 2016.
【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap Nos. 1, 2, 3, and Eul No. 1 (including Serial number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the disposition is lawful;
A. In the event that a business division is newly established in the company by expanding its business into a new area as the Plaintiff’s assertion, all of the interest paid on borrowings may be included in deductible expenses. However, as in the instant case, there is no reason to treat the new business by establishing a separate corporation as a subsidiary, and doing so. In light of the fact that the Plaintiff supplied drinking products to Lestop, etc. in the U.S. through OPH, raising a certain degree of outcome, and obtained approval by reporting direct investment to the Minister of Finance and Economy with respect to the instant loans.