beta
(영문) 서울행정법원 2017.11.10 2017구합62594

종합소득세경정거부처분취소

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff owned KRW 480,000,000 (hereinafter “instant bonds”)’s corporate bonds of Company B (hereinafter “B”).

B obtained the rehabilitation plan approval from the court on March 21, 2014, and during the rehabilitation procedure, the claim in this case was recognized as a rehabilitation claim of KRW 480 million in total, and KRW 6,953,704 in total, and KRW 486,953,704 in total, prior to the decision to commence the rehabilitation procedure (hereinafter “the rehabilitation claim in this case”).

B. According to the rehabilitation plan, 267,824,537 (55%) out of the rehabilitation claims in this case were converted into B’s 535,649 shares (107,129 shares after the consolidation), and 219,129,167 shares (45%) were subject to cash reimbursement.

C. B, while paying KRW 6,953,70,556 on November 13, 2014, withheld the interest income tax of KRW 973,518 on KRW 6,953,704.

B repaid all the remaining cash reimbursement on December 30, 2014, October 20, 2015.

Meanwhile, the Plaintiff sold shares converted into investment from June 20, 2014 to January 2, 2015, and recovered KRW 97,093,710.

In September 2016, the Plaintiff filed a claim for rectification for refund of KRW 973,518 withheld interest income tax, since the Plaintiff failed to fully recover the principal of the instant claim to the Defendant.

On November 11, 2016, the Defendant rendered a disposition of refusal on the ground that “The Plaintiff’s interest income cannot be subject to Article 51(7) of the Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act that applies only to the interest of non-business loan, and thus, a claim for rectification of global income tax that reflects the withheld interest income cannot be accepted

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). [Ground for recognition] A without dispute, entry of Gap 1 through 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The details of the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes are as shown in attached statutes;

3. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was to recover only KRW 316,222,868 out of the principal amount of the instant claim KRW 480,000,000.

267,824,537, which is a part converted into investment in rehabilitation proceedings, shall be B and the plaintiff.