(b) Violation of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act;

Housing ringare

Seoul basic domicile

2. A. A. this part* (0000 - 00000 - 000) and corporation** president

Seoul Residence

Seoul basic domicile

3. A. .00 (0000 - 00000) - stock company** representative director *

Seoul Residence

Seoul basic domicile

4.(b) Co., Ltd.***

Seoul Location

Representative Director 00

Law Firm Barun, Attorneys Lee Sung-hun, and the last sentence (Defendant * Ha-Ha)

(n)

Defendant 00 Madar 00 Madar established in the part of Malaysia, which is a tax avoidance area (this, :

(n) is the largest shareholder (83%) of the PGC ("PC"), and a fee T-line (PTV) and the Internet at the hotel, etc.

The representative director of Singapore (hereinafter referred to as the "MPL") whose primary business is to provide 000

the former is a person.

Defendant ** Council of the Gangnam-gu Seoul Central District Court*** (hereinafter referred to as "****)

As the head of the PGC is a major shareholder (17%) of the PGC.

Defendant 00 is ** the representative director of *, Defendant**** a fee T-line in hotel, etc. * A day TV)

corporation whose main business is the provision of the Internet.

On November 2007, the above PGC *** 100% of the shares of **** * and the actual accused of the PGC

00, Defendant * was operated by *

In addition, as of November 2007, PGC owned 48.75% of the shares of the above MPL as of the end of November 2007, and**

20. 01% of the shares of PEL were owned.

1. The co-principal committed by Defendant 00, Defendant 1*, Defendant 100

Defendant 100 and Defendant 1 this* from October 23, 2007 to Japan Communications Company 00 Do00 (NT) from October 23, 2007

Sale of Do00 Man-Ma00 (D000 inter- - 00000) and 100% of the above MPL equity, a subsidiary of Doo000

of 207, when negotiations were conducted, the sale price at the beginning of December 2007 is the standard U.S. dollars for the total amount of shares of MP.

As a result, USD 148, 500,000 per share ($ 5,73703 per share), the above***

Do00 man, while holding the MP stocks in advance to PGC located in the tax avoidance area, after transferring them to low-price

00 (Macomo inter-inter - Tode) Transfer to high value*** action to acquire the transfer of MPL *

The purpose of this study is to avoid the tax to be borne in Korea by reducing the income.

Defendant 100 and Defendant 1 this** on December 12, 2007 **** on Defendant 00, the representative director of the board of directors ****** on Defendant 00 ****

MPL shares 5, 179, 561 shares per share 3.40 US$17, 627, 444

US$ 100 direct the conclusion of the contract to be transferred to PGC, and Defendant 00

In preparation of the food receipt contract, the PGC has received US$ 300,000 from PGC as down payment.

(c)

Defendant 00, Defendant ** on December 21, 2007 Do00 on December 21, 2007 (Dao000 inter- - 00000) and above

As such,**** 100 per share of MPL, including the shares transferred from * 5.7703 US dollars per share.

The signature of the contract in sale of USD 148, 500, 000 shall be made on February 1, 2008, and the price shall not be made on February 1, 2008

was received as urgent.

Nevertheless, on March 31, 2009, Defendants are in the Seocho Tax Office*** 2008 against A, the competent tax authority.

In the annual settlement report, the sum of USD 5.7703 per share, the actual price for the sale of the shares, shall not be more than 73703 per share.

US$ 3.403270 per share transferred at low price for tax evasion, not USD 29, 715, 312

17. Underreporting the tax base and tax amount of the corporate tax to the effect that the sale of USD 627,44 was made;

By passing the time limit for payment, the corporate tax of the year 2008 2, 857, 254, 333

The source was evaded.

2. Defendant****

Defendant*** The representative director of the defendant company* the above Paragraph 1 in respect of the defendant's business

The act of violation such as the description was committed.

II. Presumed facts

According to the records of this case, the following facts are recognized.

(a) Changes in the ownership relationship of PEL stocks;

The shares of PGC before April 30, 2005 are 27.38%, Defendant*** 57% on April 45, 2005, and Ge000

Corpo Corporation 3. 98%, and other minority shareholders 23. 07%, respectively, and Japanese corporations

on April 30, 2005, Defendant**** of the shares of the MPL 30 April 30, 2005

From 25.56%, 13.16% from PGC, 3.21% from Ge00 Cpo Corporation, and minority shareholders from minority shareholders.

US dollars 4.211 per share 65% of the total shares of MPL, including 07%, ($ 4.211 of the total value of PE)

US currency 19 million US dollars (hereinafter referred to as US currency '$ 19 million) was acquired (hereinafter referred to as 'US currency').

shares of the PPL are 14.22% of the PGC, **** 01% of the 20.01% of the PPL, 65% of the 65% of the MPL and the Ge000 Cpool.

0. 77% was held.

On the other hand, on September 14, 2007, PGC purchased 45% of its shares from MPT, and 35% of them:

2. At USD 79444328 per share, 10% per share purchased at USD 5.5342 (the weighted average purchase price, if any)

PGC after September 21, 2007, NIF SBC VENURECO CO. : < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 20347, Sep. 21, 2007; Presidential Decree No. 20357, Feb. 23, 2007; Presidential Decree No. 2

LTD (hereinafter referred to as 'NIF') $ 10.47% per share of 5.5342 U.S. per share (total 14, 99, 69.69

USPL’s shares (this is about 48.75% by PGC, Defendant**** 01% by 00.01% by 20.

MTPP 20%, NIF 10.47%, Gemini Cpo Corporation 0.77%, respectively).

Defendant***** At the time of the PGC on December 12, 2007, Defendant**** at the MPL’s note held by *

US$ 3.40327 per share 5, 179, 561 shares (20. 01%, hereinafter referred to as "the shares of this case")

(based on USD 80,00,000) sale (based on USD 17,627,444, the total value of USD 80,000)

PGC has 68.76%, 20%, NIF 10.47%, and Gemini Cpo Corporation 0.77%, respectively.

PGC on December 21, 2007

USD 100 100,000,000,000 ($ 5.737033 per share) including the instant shares

sale (hereinafter referred to as "transfer of 2 shares of this case") and from NIF and MPT on the same day.

The contract was concluded to purchase the MPL shares held by them.

B. Meanwhile, PGC is a corporation incorporated in Malaysia, which is a tax avoidance area, on May 2, 2000.

and after November 2007, PGC owned Defendant**** 100% of the issued shares and owned Defendant.

***** is a 100% subsidiary of PGC, 83% of the shares issued by PGC is Defendant 00, 17%, and 17% of the shares issued by PGC.

Defendant* this* is owned by Defendant *, this* by Defendant ** Defendant *** the president of * and Defendant 00.

Defendant**** the representative director, Defendant 00 was the representative director of MPL. In addition, as seen earlier.

The PGC, through the stock transfer contract of this case No. 1 and No. 2, ** The shares of this case from *

3. per share 3.40327 US$ and 100% of the Do00 SDR shares, including the shares in this case,

Eul sold USD 5.7703 per share to USD 7.773, but, if Defendant*** Do00 per share to USD 00.

In the event that shares have been sold immediately to USD 5,703 per share, the defendant*** is the transfer of shares of this case

Accordingly, approximately KRW 2, 857, 254, 333 of corporate tax in 2008 should be additionally imposed.

Ⅲ. Determination as to the existence of the Defendants’ duty to pay taxes

The former Tax Act (amended by Act No. 9919, Jan. 1, 2010; hereinafter referred to as the "former Tax Act")

Tax evasion under Article 9 (1) of the Punishment Act ("the Punishment Act") shall not apply to the State by the taxpayer.

penalty shall be imposed on a certain amount of tax obligation deemed to be a crime in which such tax obligation is evaded.

tax under tax law to constitute a crime of tax evasion, which is prescribed by the no taxation without law.

Since a tax claim should be established upon fulfillment of the requirements, the tax law shall become a taxpayer.

Unless a taxation requirement under which the obligation to pay is required is not satisfied, that the tax liability is not established.

Of course, there is no room for establishing the crime of tax evasion (Supreme Court Decision 2003Do5631 Delivered on June 10, 2005).

see, see, e.g., Defendant*** * Shares in this case to Do00 Roster, as in the facts charged of this case

5. We examine whether the corporate tax is liable for payment by deeming sale to USD 73703.

shall be deemed to have been established.

1. The parties' assertion

A. Prosecutor’s assertion

Prosecutor: Defendant **** A 100% subsidiary of PGC and management is also Defendant 00, this**

The same f. Defendant 00, this part of this case* The first stock transfer of this case, the first stock transfer of this case, was already made to the first patrol officer on December 2007.

Defendant ***, PGC, etc.’s shares 100% per share between the Do00 Doz.* 100% of the MPL’s shares

5. Although there was an agreement to sell USD 73703 to USD 73, Defendant*** A directly above price this death.

Establishment for the purpose of tax avoidance in order to avoid corporate tax to be borne when selling shares;

PGC entered into a low-price sales contract in the form of the PGC, and the PGC re- Doz. 00 man z.

PGC which is only a nominal holder in the form of a bypass transfer, due to the transfer of the shares of this case

In accordance with the substance over form principle, the transfer profit as a whole reverts to the original selling corporation.

Goin**** should be reverted to*, and in reality PGC***** not transfer gains of transfer to*

Even if you have received **** If you are not less than 100 per cent of the PGC 100 per cent of the transfer profit to Defendant****

Defendant *** is liable to pay corporate tax equivalent to KRW 2,857, 254, 333 because it belongs to the defendant** is liable to pay corporate tax.

1).

B. Defendants’ assertion

As to this, the Defendants were to list the shares transfer of the instant No. 1 on the Japanese Stock Market (IPO);

Innit Pubic Publing is a valid transaction made at an arm's length price, and is a room.

There is no separate and specific denial provision even if it is based on the principle of quality taxation.

No. 2 at the time of the first stock transfer contract of this case

Since the conclusion of a share transfer contract has not been finally confirmed, Defendant **** A* 00 man 00

In addition, it cannot be deemed that the instant shares were sold to USD 5,703 per share, and thus, the corporate tax liability is liable to pay corporate tax.

I asserts that the burden does not be borne.

2. Subject to the principle of substantial taxation 2) Defendant**** The instant shares to Do00 man per share.

5. Whether the sale can be deemed to have been made to USD 73703

A. Relevant precedents

The Constitution adopts the principle of no taxation without law and all citizens shall pay taxes as prescribed by law.

(Article 38) The items and rates of taxes are prescribed by law (Article 59); and

Under this principle of no taxation without law, the laws enacted by the National Assembly, a representative institution of the people.

shall be prescribed at the rate, and the strict interpretation and application in the enforcement of the law shall be made.

, even if there is a need for taxation, the extended interpretation or analogical application of administrative convenience is made.

It is not allowed to resolve this (Supreme Court en banc Decision 98Du1731 delivered on March 16, 200).

see Supreme Court Decision). The issue of tax burden in most economic transactions today is important for the parties concerned.

Considering that it is one of the elements of decision-making, such no taxation without law is established.

In fact, the property rights, etc. of individuals can be guaranteed because it can not secure legal stability and predictability.

It is because there is no reason.

Therefore, the person liable for duty payment is to achieve the same economic purpose when conducting economic activities.

Since one of the several legal relations can be selected, it is excessive tax amount.

Even if an act is to avoid the burden, the tax authority shall, unless there are special circumstances.

The legal relationship chosen by the parties shall be respected (Supreme Court Decision 2000Du200 delivered on August 21, 2001).

963 delivered on the basis of the substance over form principle, the transaction of taxpayers is not in the form of the transaction.

In order to deny the validity of the act of tax avoidance, the law under the principle of no taxation without law can be denied.

There should be an individual and specific denial provision in the rate (Supreme Court Decision 105 delivered on May 14, 1991).

Supreme Court Decision 190Nu3027, Supreme Court Decision 2007Du26629 Decided April 9, 2009, Supreme Court Decision 2007Du2629 Decided April 28, 2011

2010Du3961, supra.

On the other hand, the principle of substantial taxation is realized in tax legal relations, which is the basic ideology of the Constitution.

As a practical principle for the purpose of avoiding the tax burden, the facts of taxation requirements shall be

If the appearance is taken from a unreasonable form or appearance that is different from the substance, the form or appearance is not made;

tax avoidance by imposing tax on a place with the capacity to pay taxes in substance; and

The main purpose is to realize the tax justice by enhancing the equity of taxation. This is to achieve the tax justice.

Various tax laws and regulations are not in conflict with the principle of no taxation without law, which is the basic principle of law.

In the application of changing economic life relationships, predictability and legal stability are not undermined.

by interpreting it within the scope of purpose and flexibly, thereby preventing the punishment of no taxation without the law.

It is complementary and indivisible to the principle of no taxation without law in that it guarantees effectiveness.

Of course, if the principle of substantial taxation is excessively expanded and applied, the tax law states will be applied.

Therefore, there may be side effects that the tax authority can be abused.

In principle, in order to deny the effectiveness of the selected legal relationship, separate individual regulations are required.

title holder shall be subject to taxation, such as income or profit, property, transactions, etc.

· is not capable of management and substantially controlling it through control, etc. over the nominal owner; and

for the purpose of tax avoidance, the disparity between such name and substance is separate by the manager.

(2) In the event of such exceptional circumstances, the taxable object is substantially subject to taxation.

be deemed to have been vested in a person who controls and manages such person, and such person shall be the person liable for tax payment.

Whether it constitutes an exceptional case or not shall be the details and purpose of the ownership of the taxable subject of taxation, the source and management thereof.

in full, all circumstances, such as the process of disposition, the ability of the person to whom the title belongs, and the control relationship with him;

It should be determined by consideration (Supreme Court en banc Decision 2008Du8499 Decided January 19, 2012)

[Reference] .

B. Determination

1) Each evidence duly adopted and examined by this Court, and each testimony of the witness pathmism and pathy

The major circumstances that correspond to the facts charged of this case recognized by this case are as follows.

A) The defendant 00 is the representative director of MPT on November 11, 2007 Muoto (Mauo)

Yoshimoto) e-mail [RE: NT Docomo Deal (CONFIDENAL)]: “N”

00 Based on USD 150,000,000,000 for the total value of MPL up to November 23, 2007

After completion of negotiations on food acquisition contracts, November 30, 2007 with the approval of the board of directors, the negotiation on food acquisition contracts shall be completed, and on November 30, 2007

3. To conclude a contract, specific evisa and proposal were made (to be Docomo on the date of Whites Rocomo)

Propoling qucrete 1.0 e.g. 1. e. e.g. 150 e.g.

fully diluted base . 3 . Negotiation for DA will be completed by Nov 23 . 4 . Docomo

1. 5. 5. 5. 12. 2007. 12. 2007

3. The note between the Defendant *, 00, KRs Edmbros, advisory attorney-at-law, the note 00 man-vis

The draft of the food transfer contract was being reviewed, and the defendant 00 was on December 7, 2007.

The e-mail (for title: Nex Monde) shall be sent to Mauo Yosto (for example, Nex Monde) and the Do00 seal.

The transaction with 00 shall be final on the basis of USD 144,850,000 (the buyer).

Docomo deal will be about US $ 148 . 5 Mil . ) " 을 제안하는 등 2007 . 11 . 경부터 피고인

No. 00, between this**, etc. and Do00 human resource00, the total value of the MP shall be approximately 150 million US dollars.

Detailed negotiations on the transfer of MPL stocks were under way.

B) NIF shares 10.47% per share from PGC on September 21, 2007, 5.5342$10.47% per share (total amount)

14. Purchasing USD 14, 999, 978. The above contract was MP within one year from June 30, 2009.

If the stock market is not listed, at least the initial acquisition price at the option of the NIF

investment for listing in the Japanese stock market, such as for the redemption of MP stocks;

PGC, on the other hand, Do00 man 00 according to the stock transfer contract of this case

For sale of 100% of the shares, due to the fact that the NIF had to re-purchase the shares.

Defendant 00 on December 10, 2007, three months after the NIF purchased MP stocks.

From around December 12, 2007, the NIF expressed its intention to re-purchase the MPL stocks, and the NIF made the PGC on December 12, 2007.

The Defendant agreed to re-sale the NIF’s MPL stocks to 112.5% of the purchase price.

e-mail (title : NIF) from Maginet No. 13 December 13, 2007 to Maginet Jap, e-mail (title : NIF)

Before sending Agreft Do00 persons and PGC sign on a share sales contract between Do00 persons and PGC

We have to conclude the Convention with the NIF. PGC and NIF termination of the Agreement with the Do00 SIF

PGC has completed consultations on compensation to be granted to NIF, so that:

I shall prepare the draft. We shall send the draft contract until the end of this Note.

( Before PG signs SPA with IT , PG need to sign following agreement with NIF . PG

and NIF e.g. PG scomens to nF e.g.

case inter - touch deal is closed . So , prepare draft below . We need to send draft to

NIF 【wek’s 00, including Defendant 1, this* from December 10, 2007 to December 13, 201.

up to 100 Do0 Do 00 Do 00 Do 100 Do 100 Do 10. 47% of the MPL shares to be sold

A detailed consultation was made from the NIF to re-purchase it.

C) Meanwhile, the down payment of the instant stock transfer contract is USD 300,000,000.

17. The balance payment date is relatively small compared to USD 627,44. PGC as of January 31, 2008

Defendant**** upon receipt of the price under the stock transfer contract of this case from Do00 man 00 Doz.*

C. The e-mail sent by Defendant 00 on December 12, 2007 to Defendant 00

" 직원들에게 이 사건 제1 주식양도계약을 알릴 필요가 없다 ( No need to tell

empoye is referring to doneing, referring to done), which is dedicated to the collection of chioe.

2) However, in full view of the following facts admitted by the above evidence, the above facts are as follows:

1) The facts acknowledged by paragraph (1) alone are the subject matter arising from the transfer of stocks of this case by the principle of substantial taxation.

Goman*** It is insufficient to recognize the obligation to pay corporate tax*, and there is no other evidence to recognize it.

(A) the parallel promotion of the sale of the stocks listed in the Japanese stock market (IPO) and the MPL stocks;

(1) Defendant 00, this** from around 2005, the list of Japanese stock markets (IPO) and MP from around 2005

Mitish sub-public UFJ, which was promoted in parallel with sale, around July 2006, as the Director of the Intellectual Property Office.

The Intellectual Property Organization has been selected by the SUFJ (hereinafter referred to as "MUFJ") and has promoted IPO.

(2) MUFJ is conducting the same kind of business as MPL, and accused*** a major shareholder of *

Japan of MPL on the fact that a link is a listed corporation of Korea and has low business performance

Since the listing of the stock market can be an obstacle, defendant**** the shares of this case** the PGC

(On the other hand, the MUFJ has continuously recommended that the MPL shares held by the MPL.

The request was made to lower the level below 20%, and accordingly, the TPP requires the MPC around September 2007.

Food 45% of the sale was made).

(3) Accordingly, the defendant 00 is one of the MUFJ on July 28, 2007, and Hamman City (Hanada)

The e-mail sent to Atstsuos hi [No. : Magiet Status (CONFIDNTRAL)], and the e-mail “I” on December 2007.

to ensure that the link is not superior to the listing of the Japanese stock market by MPL.

MPL의 주주명단에서 피고인 * * * * 을 뺄 것 [ Magilink : 0 % ( We will remove Magilink

7.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.3 2.2 3.2 3.2 2.3 2.3.3 2.4.4.

Gohaps up to the end of 2007, for listing in the Japanese stock market of MPL*** Ownership for the purpose of listing in the Japanese stock market of MPL*

The shares of this case were disposed of.

(4) Do00 Do 00 Do 100 Do Do 200 Do Do 200 Do 202

The time when the negotiation began is around October 2007, whichever is the major shareholder of the PEL from MP to PEC.

that the change is known to have been made and that the PEL is making efforts for listing in the Japanese stock market.

I stated in this note. "I stated in this note."

(5) The Rouzo Naka, which is in charge of the practice of the MPL's implementation of the IPO, shall be held by the IPO on November 22, 2007.

Defendant 00 to employ additional persons with IPO experience for smooth promotion

Then, on November 27, 2007, Maginet Yamazaki, Japan, Japan, the Defendant 00

For the MPO, I have arranged and reported the matters to be carried out in the first half of 2008.

Han MUFJ held a meeting for the Intellectual PropertyO on December 11, 2007, and especially the title of this case

1 Formulate, even on December 17, 2007, after the conclusion of a stock transfer contract, schedule for IPO (draft)

The director in charge of finance (CFO) of the PE is sent to the persons related to IPO, such as the fixed number of IP directors.

In light of these facts, the Defendants at the time of the instant stock transfer contract

Not only the sale of shares but also the listing of the Japanese stock market of the PEL was promoted in parallel.

The first stock transfer contract of this case seems to have been a series of procedures for the MPO.

B) Non-determination of a contract for stock transfer with Do00 man 00

(1) On May 2007, 200 Do 00 Do 00, the parent company of around 00 Do Do 00, purchase 100 Do 100 Do Do 20

J. Around May 2007 and July 2 of the same year, MPL was inspected on two occasions, and the draft map of the contract.

The instant case did not comply with certain conditions, even though it did not take the immediately preceding stage of transaction, such as preparing two to three times.

around August 2007, which was 3 to 4 months prior to the date of the conclusion of the share transfer contract

In this regard, there are various kinds of events, such as Garling Sarling Sarling Sarling Sarring from 2006 to 2007, Lerry Capital, etc.

Although the companies have expressed their intent to purchase the MP, there is no actual contract concluded.

(2) The defendant 00 is the body of the second share transfer contract of this case in the first interrogation of suspect.

In the event of a determination, the approximate price is anticipated, but at all, whether the said contract is actually concluded.

I did not know. The negotiation with NIF is premised on the conclusion of a contract with Do00 SIF

the amount to be received by the NIF plus interest on the principal of the NIF, which was tried to be determined in advance.

I have been aware of the approval of the board of directors until November 30, 2007, and even until November 30, 2007. Docomos first.

I would no longer believe that it is a company that does not continue to comply with the commitments, including transactions.

I want to see that there are many variables. On the other hand, I want to Do00 human resources and labor as advisory companies.

D Securities shall be subject to the approval of the Council on November 7, 2007 by the end of November 2007 and shall be late upon the approval of the Council.

3. Until November 13, 2007, at the Media Development Agency of Washington, even though I wish to enter into a contract,

It may take at least 180 days at least 30 days on the merger approval between MP and Do00 man 00.

The contract with Do Governor 00, Do Governor 00 on November 1, 2007, in which the information was made available.

The possibility of conclusion was very vague. It stated "....".

(3) As seen earlier, Do00 human resources 00, after obtaining the approval of the board of directors on November 30, 2007, 2007

12. 3 Notwithstanding the presentation of a schedule to conclude a stock transfer contract of this case No. 2, Do

00 Approval by the Council of Turkey00 shall be obtained on December 19, 2007, and the approval by the Council of UNFCCC00 shall be obtained on the 21st of the same month.

The second share transfer contract of this case was concluded on December 21, 2007.

(4) On the other hand, Do 00 Do 00 Do Do 00 is not Do 00, a parent company, to receive funds from Do 00

approval by the board of directors of the United Nations00 00 Do00, because it does not have the ability to pay the transfer price of 2 shares

It is essential to do so, and even if it is approved by the Do 00 Ra 00 Do 00

The approval or approval of the board of directors was unclear.

(5) The share transfer contract of this case No. 2 is responsible for the transfer of a small number of shares, MP and

liability for the arrangement of Stockholm options, etc. granted to officers of MPL for contingent liabilities of the subsidiary;

The obligation not to engage in any competition, etc. may be terminated to meet the requirements of several conditions, such as the obligation not to engage in the competition

for this reason, Do 00 man 00 PGC at the time of entering into the stock transfer contract of this case

The down payment did not also be paid. The Jars Red (Chars Reded) which is the representative director of Do00 Doz00.

“Until December 19, 2007, the negotiation of more than 100 transaction terms and arrangements was under way.”

Therefore, the second stock transfer contract of this case was not concluded, and such a situation was not possible.

Terms and conditions of transactions are not exempted between the parties to the transaction or are not fulfilled by a specified deadline;

United Nations 00 Do00 on January 30, 2008

The exemption of such terms and conditions of transactions that are not satisfied, and the exemption of such terms and conditions of transactions

00 Trades in this Section because consent is required of ter00 and UN00 Do00, so that there is a trade in this Section.

§ 30,00,000 or less, and in fact, it shall be subject to the Supplementary Agreement of January 29, 2008.

The obligation of PGC that was not done until then is exempted, and the second stock transfer contract of this case is exempted.

PGC received the transfer proceeds on January 31, 2008.

(6) In particular, the contract under which the NIF re-purchases 10.47% of the MF shares 10.47% from the NIF

Section 1. After entering into a stock transfer contract, it was actually concluded on December 21, 2007, and the status between NIF and NI.

The instant contract is automatically concluded until March 31, 2008, if the instant contract is not concluded until March 31, 2008.

It was reversed, and in this case, PGC did not impose any disadvantage (3.3.

Termination if not satisfied . The Vendor acknowledges that if Closing does not

occur by 31 March 2008 , then this agreement will automatically terminated . 3 . 4 .

No. Do Governor 이이이이 이이이 이이이이 이이이 이이이이 이이이 이이이이 이이

there will be no liability or other penalty to the Purchaser pursuant to this

The MPC, while the PGC, at the time of the same day from the MPT.

purchase at USD 5.438707 per share 20% of the MPL shares held by it, and the above contract also

The second stock transfer contract of this case is automatically reversed unless it is terminated by March 31, 2008.

PGC shares to Do00 man 00 under the stock transfer agreement of this case

100 per cent transfer of 10 per cent, the above contracts re-purchaseing MPL stocks from NIF and MPT;

All of the facts that the 2nd share transfer contract of this case may not be terminated successfully

is called. ...

As above, the share transfer contract of this case No. 2 is a contract with a large premise and is N00 Do

00 The approval of the board of directors was uncertain, and the contract with the United Nations00 00 Do00 was entered into between three and four months before France.

contract has been concluded in accordance with the schedule first presented by Do00 S. S. S. S. S. S. S. S.C.

The second stock transfer contract at the time of the contract for the first stock transfer, such as not effected, shall be finally scheduled.

It is difficult to deem that there was such act.

C) The subject of ownership of gains from the transfer of the instant shares

Meanwhile, the transfer margin of the shares of this case is deemed to have been actually reverted to Defendant***

In addition, there is no evidence, in particular, defendant*** is the subsidiary of the PGC, and there are no special circumstances.

One subsidiary has substantially controlled and managed the transfer gains of the shares of this case through the parent company.

It is difficult to see that the PGC was not a defendant*** in addition to * at the time of the contract for stock transfer of the first and second shares.

A company was holding approximately 40% of the shares of link (40%).

3) As to other facts alleged by the prosecutor

A) According to the evidence mentioned above, Defendant 00’s first share transfer contract of this case

PGC with respect to the transfer of shares No. 1 of this case, on March 19, 2008, three months after the date on which the notice was issued.

India*** * Offer Leter sent to * prepare a letter of intent to purchase shares, and this* e-mail to *

(b) Item (b) is deemed to have been dispatched to PG, but the above Pffer Let (WOE) will be entitled to purchase shares.

Before the commencement of the tax investigation against the Defendants, the Defendants were made after the commencement.

of this section in preparation for a tax investigation, it shall be deemed that the Leffer made the above section.

In addition, there are no phrases that consider the tax investigation on a large number of e-mail sent and received by the Defendants.

(2).

B) Also, according to the share transfer agreement of this case No. 2, Defendant*** A MP still has a note

Food 5, 179, 561 shares are deemed to have been held, but not to have been described therein, No. 2 of this case

PGC at the time of a stock transfer contract *** any balance under the stock transfer contract of this case to *

The transfer of ownership was not made without payment, and the share transfer contract of this case No. 2

Do “Defendant*** A* entered into a contract to transfer MPL shares 5, 179, 561 shares to PGC;

The sale and transfer shall be completed prior to the termination of this contract (The Magink Share Royer).

De De 12, 2007, 5, 179, 561 Nos. 120

The Company, the sub-committee, and the prescribed terms and conditions for the dissolution. The us and the Company

transfer will be completed prior to Closing ) " 이라고 명시되어 있다 .

C) As to the assertion that PGC is a corporation established for the purpose of evading domestic taxes

For the various reasons, a corporation located in a tax avoidance area is established, and the tax association is established.

The sole reason of the transaction with a corporation established in the area under the jurisdiction is that there is a domestic tax avoidance purpose.

in addition, the intention of active concealment for domestic tax avoidance is shown, etc.

In the event of additional proof of special circumstances, the share of this case under the substance over form principle

I regard the future as a round transfer, ** is liable to pay corporate tax to the defendant**, and the case is

In the case of a corporation established in the part of Malaysia, which is a tax avoidance area, by PGC, a human and physical group

There shall be no position, and with respect to the income of PGC, a national and a special case shall be subject to the Adjustment of International Taxes Act

income to an individual pursuant to the dividend provision, etc. of a domestic shareholder of a corporation in which such corporation has a relationship;

In principle, there is no way to impose taxes except for the imposition of taxes, and the defendant 00 is 200.

4. Establishment of an investment company in Malaysia from an attorney-at-law belonging to the law office of Gyeong Kim & T;

PGC is established upon the advice of the legal advantage of the tax law, and the advice

If the voting rights of domestic investors and their specially related persons exceed 50%, the Korean tax law;

that the investment company established in the section may be treated as the Doing Corporation

It is recognized, however, that Defendant 00 holding 83% of the shares of PGC from around 2000 to 2007.

Until then, the Korean resident did not become a domestic resident and was not liable to pay the domestic income tax.

Defendant 00 appears to be Maginet in the name of the corporation located in the United States of America on 2000

Corpo Corporation (Maget Cpool Corporation) is established on 2004, and the business transfer is made to MP.

in the process of acquiring the tax in the United States (which seems to have been liquidated).

in light of the fact that the prosecutor appears to establish the PGC in order to reduce the amount of such

The evidence alone is difficult to recognize that PGC was established for domestic tax avoidance.

C. Sub-determination

Therefore, as seen above, the first stock transfer contract of this case for the MPO

The second share transfer contract at the time of entering into the first share transfer contract of this case.

The Defendant appears to have not been finally determined, and the transfer margin due to the transfer of shares No. 2 in this case

*** there is no evidence to deem that there is a real control ** PGC is a domestic tax avoidance;

In full view of the fact that it is difficult to view it as being established in a manner and the legal principles of the above precedents:

The evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone that a series of transactions related to the shares of this case*** the law of this case*

bypassing due to the purpose of avoiding the obligation to pay taxes, or PGC is not a formal holder;

* Defendant * * A de facto control over the transfer gains of the shares of this case through PGC

Since it is insufficient to recognize that there is a wrongful calculation clause or international tax adjustment under the Corporate Tax Act.

Defendant ** under the transfer price taxation system under the laws relating to the transfer price assessment system** aside from the duty of tax payment*

Go. Subject to the substance over form principle, Defendant*** A Do00 man 00 per share of the instant shares under the substance over form principle

5. The defendant*** has the obligation to pay corporate tax to the defendant as he has been recognized to sell USD 73703.

It is difficult to see, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Whether the act constitutes a fraud or other unlawful act

In accordance with the substance over form principle, Defendant*** A* Shares of this case to 00 man ter0, pursuant to the substance over form principle

5. The defendant is liable to pay corporate tax on the assumption that he/she sold USD 737033, even if he/she is liable to pay corporate tax.

India**** A * A 'Fraud or other unlawful acts' only when a tax has been evaded by 'the aggravated punishment, etc. for a specific crime.

Since the violation of the law (tax) or the violation of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act is established, this review is conducted.

1. The parties' assertion

A. Prosecutor’s assertion

The prosecutor's substance of the transaction of the shares in this case*** A's MPL shares in his own possession

E. The sales of USD 5. 7703 per share to USD 29, 715,312 per share, but it is positive;

(2) If the shares were to be transferred before the transfer of the shares, the corporation shall intervene in the middle of the PGC, which is a nominal holder; and

Defendant**** A* selling the said shares to PGC USD 3.40327 per share and selling them to USD 17,627,444 per share.

reporting as if the person had obtained such income, is a false report accompanied by a prior income concealment act, which is a fraud or other

I argue that it constitutes an illegal act.

B. Defendants’ assertion

As to this, the Defendants are responsible for the transaction of the shares of this case as they are.

tax reporting, etc. by the tax authority has not made it significantly difficult to track the tax;

Article 9 of the former Punishment of Tax Evaders Act only on the basis of the establishment of a corporation in a tax evasion area;

The above argument that it cannot be seen as ‘the above'.

2. Determination:

"Fraud or other illicit act in the crime of tax evasion provided for in Article 9 of the former Punishment of Tax Evaders Act"

the term "act of making it possible to evade taxes, which is deemed to be unlawful by social norms.

of this section, i.e., a deceptive scheme which makes it impossible or considerably difficult to impose and collect taxes, or other illicit and affirmative actions.

reporting under tax law merely without accompanying any other act;

(b) that the failure to file a false report does not fall within the scope of this section; or (c)

Court Decision 2001Do3797 delivered on February 14, 2003, etc.) and non-declaration or underreporting of taxable objects; and

In addition, the exchange and return of means of payment, such as false recording on books, checks, and several borroweds;

Where any circumstance occurs, such as repeated use of coordinates, which shows the intention of active concealment.

may be deemed to have made impossible or considerably difficult to impose and collect taxes (by law).

Seoul High Court Decision 2006Do5041 decided August 23, 2007

In this case, ① Defendant**** on March 31, 2009, the Seocho Tax Office, the competent tax office, 2008

In making a report on the settlement of accounts to the Do, the shares of this case to PGC in accordance with the stock transfer agreement of this case

B. A list of corporate tax taxation that sales USD 3.40327 per share, gross amount of USD 17, 627, and 444

applicable and applicable tax amount, and foreign exchange is also reported to the President of the Korea Exchange Bank.

Defendant**** ownership MPL shares under the first stock transfer agreement of this case** ownership MPL shares under the first stock transfer agreement of this case

Part 1 of this case reporting that a direct overseas investment project was liquidated by transferring all of the PGC

Defendant *** Ack on the financial statements of 2008 * Ack on the financial statements of 208

The report entered the first stock transfer contract of this case into and announced to the public by the tax authorities, and the defendant

Defendant deeming that the first stock transfer contract of this case was a low price transfer according to the documents submitted by the

India*** imposition of corporate tax against the Defendants, etc.* The Defendants are subject to the instant First and Second Stock Transfer Contracts

(2) Circumstances that the corporation was engaged in transactions with a corporation located in the tax avoidance area.

It is difficult to see that “the act of fraud or other improper act” was committed, as seen earlier.

It is difficult to conclude that the instant share transfer contract aims to avoid domestic taxes.

In full view of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone, the Defendants’ active concealments tax

A deceptive scheme or other unlawful means to the extent that it is impossible or considerably difficult to impose and collect the penalty;

It is difficult to see that the act was a tax evasion, and there is no other evidence to recognize it.

V. Conclusion

Therefore, the facts charged in this case constitute a case where there is no proof of criminal facts.

In accordance with the latter part of Article 325, all defendants shall be acquitted.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

Judges Nam-gi

Judges Choi Young-young

In this case, the prosecutor asserts that the prosecutor is liable to pay corporate tax to the defendant*** under the principle of substantial taxation, not the provision of wrongful calculation.

(In the absence of special circumstances, the amount of tax adjustment due to the denial of wrongful calculation under the Corporate Tax Act is fraudulent and illegal under the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act.

It is not due to Supreme Court Decision 2004Do817 Decided June 29, 2006.

2) The provisions regarding the principle of substantial taxation are as follows.

A) Framework Act on National Taxes (amended by Act No. 8830 of Dec. 31, 2007)

Article 14 (Real Taxation)

(1) If the ownership of the income, profit-making property, or transaction subject to taxation is merely nominal, and there is another person to whom it actually belongs.

Tax-related Acts shall apply to a person to whom such person actually belongs as a taxpayer.

(2) The provisions pertaining to the calculation of tax base in tax-related Acts shall, notwithstanding the name or form of the income, profit, property, or transaction, be in accordance with such substance.

shall apply.

B) Corporate Tax Act

Article 4 (Real Taxation)

(1) A corporation to which all or part of revenues from assets (property) or business legally reverts and a corporation to which it actually reverts are different.

This Act shall apply to a corporation to which the revenue actually accrues.

(2) The provisions concerning the calculation of the amount of taxable income subject to corporate tax shall, notwithstanding the name or form of such income or profits, be in accordance with the substance thereof.

shall apply.

C) Adjustment of International Taxes Act

Article 2-2 (Real Taxation to International Trade)

(1) In international trades, the nominal owner and a person to whom the title holder or actual title holder belongs with respect to the ownership of the income, profit, property, or transaction subject to

In other cases, the tax treaty shall apply to the person to whom it actually belongs as a taxpayer.

(2) The provisions on the calculation of tax base in international trades shall be real, notwithstanding the title or form of income, profit, property, or transaction.

In accordance with the substance of the tax treaty, the tax treaty shall apply.

(3) A tax treaty and this Act may be concluded by indirect means via a third party or through two or more acts or transactions in an international trade.

direct transactions between the parties, depending on the economic substance, shall be deemed to have been made by the party, in the case of an unjust benefit.

Tax treaties and this Act shall apply by deeming it as a continuous act or transaction.

3) Article 17 (Deemed Dividend on Retained Earnings of Specific Foreign Corporations)

(1) For a foreign corporation whose head or principal office is located in a state or region in which the amount of tax borne by a corporation is 15/100 or less of the actual income, the amount of tax

Where a national makes an investment, each business year of a corporation having a special relationship with a national among the foreign corporations (hereinafter referred to as "specific foreign corporation").

Of the distributable retained earnings (income accrued to a national) as of the end, the amount to be reverted to a national shall be deemed to have been paid by a national.

(2) The scope of a national subject to paragraph (1) shall be 10/100 of the total number of outstanding stocks or total amount of investment of a specific foreign corporation as of the end of each

person who directly or indirectly holds at least 10 percent of the total number of outstanding shares or the total amount of investment. In such cases, 10 percent of the total number of outstanding shares or the total amount of

A person who falls within the scope of his/her family under Article 779 of the Civil Act shall include shares issued or equity shares directly owned by him/her.