경정불가처분취소
1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. The Plaintiffs are business operators running wholesale and retail business, such as duty-free oil, in the name of “D gas stations” in Kimhae-si, and Plaintiff A and Plaintiff B were joint business operators of 50% shares by 2010, respectively, and Plaintiff A are sole business operators from 2011.
B. According to the Busan Regional Tax Office’s audit and inspection records of the Board of Audit and Inspection, the Defendants notified the Plaintiffs of the total amount of KRW 261,590,390 (263,051,790, and KRW 98,538,600,000 (hereinafter “instant refund”) of the individual consumption tax, traffic, energy and environment tax, education tax, and driving tax refunded after selling the tax-free oil in 2010 and 2011, and the amount of income tax was not added to the tax base of global income tax in 2010 and 2011.
Accordingly, the Plaintiffs added the instant refund to the total amount of income in 2010 and 2011, and paid the amount after filing a revised return of the comprehensive income tax on March 22, 2013.
C. On May 31, 2013, Plaintiff A filed a request for correction against the head of the competent tax office of Suwon in 2010 for the total of KRW 30,613,93,939, and the total of KRW 31,120,326, and the total of KRW 36,706,423, and the total of KRW 36,706,423, and the total of KRW 25,886,73 and KRW 6,427,675, and KRW 32,408,40,08, and Plaintiff B filed a request for correction against the head of the competent tax office of Suwon on July 11, 2013.
On June 4, 2013, the director of the regional tax office of defendant Kim Yong-soo issued a provisional corrective measure to the plaintiff A, and the director of the regional tax office of defendant Su Young-gu issued a provisional corrective measure to the plaintiff B on September 3, 2013 (hereinafter collectively referred to as the "instant corrective measure").
The reason is that the plaintiffs under-reported the comprehensive income tax without reflecting the amount of the refund of this case in 2010 and the necessary expenses (purchase cost) in 2011.
E. The Plaintiffs are as follows.