logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2019.10.11 2019나2003170
부당이득금
Text

1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff, which orders payment below, shall be revoked.

2...

Reasons

1. The grounds for this part of this Court’s reasoning are as follows: (a) the corresponding part of the grounds for the judgment of the court of first instance (including the details of withholding, etc. (attached Form 1) and the corresponding part of the grounds for the judgment of the court of first instance (including the details of withholding, etc. (attached Form 1) and attached Form 2). As such,

No. 5-6 of the last 1st e.g., “N.S. 4.4 million won was withheld from income tax, etc. on other income and paid it to the Defendant.” The e.g., “S. 4.4 million won was withheld from income tax, etc. on other income and paid to the Defendant, etc.”

The 6th and 15th each "Incheon District Court 2014Na8841" shall be read as "Incheon District Court 2014Na18841."

The term "C and 410 households" in the table at the bottom of the 6th part shall be "the remaining 410 households except C".

[2] Attached Table 2] Article 39 of the Framework Act on National Taxes (amended by Act No. 16097, Dec. 31, 2018); Article 40 of the former Framework Act on National Taxes (amended by Act No. 16097, Dec. 31, 2018); Article 42-2(c) of the former Income Tax Act (amended by Act No. 12852, Dec. 23, 2014); Article 41 of the Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 29523, Feb. 12, 2019); Article 41 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 29523, Feb. 12, 2019); Article 39 of the former Corporate Tax Act (amended by Act No. 1608, Dec. 24, 2018); Article 45-2(c) or 45(c) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to “property cancellation or cancellation”).

2. The reasoning for this part of the court’s judgment on the previous defense before the merits is that it is identical to the corresponding part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420

3...

arrow