(심리불속행) 원고가 종회로부터 지급받은 금액의 실질은 ‘재산권에 관한 알선수수료’임[국승]
Seoul High Court-2015-Nu-5705 (2016.15)
Cho Jae-2013-China-3094 ( December 30, 2013)
(D) The substance of the amount that the Plaintiff received from the close meeting is the brokerage fee for the right to property.
(C) In the event that the land purchase agreement between the Plaintiff and the Seoul Special Metropolitan City is concluded, it is reasonable to deem that the Plaintiff received the instant amount from the above clans in return for mediating the agreement on the land acquisition between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff.
Article 21 of the Income Tax Act
2016du4636 global income and revocation of such disposition.
LL
Head of △ District Office
Seoul High Court Decision 2015Nu57705 Decided June 15, 2016
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.
All of the records of this case and the judgment of the court below and the grounds of appeal were examined, but it is clear that the assertion on the grounds of appeal by the appellant constitutes Article 4 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure for Appeal and therefore, the appeal is dismissed under Article 5 of the above Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by