Suwon District Court-2017-Gu Partnership-6774 ( October 13, 2018)

Unless special circumstances exist, expenses disbursed in violation of social order are excluded from deductible expenses.

Generally recognized ordinary expenses refer to expenses that are deemed to have been disbursed under the same situation by other corporations operating the same kind of business as taxpayers. Determination of whether such expenses constitute such expenses shall be made by comprehensively taking into account the course and purpose of disbursement, form, amount, effect, etc. of the expenses, barring special circumstances, the expenses that were disbursed in violation of social order is excluded.

Article 19 (Scope of Deductible Expenses)

2018Nu4043 Revocation of Disposition of Imposition of Value-Added Tax, etc.

○○ and one other

○ Head of tax office

Suwon District Court Decision 2017Guhap67774 Decided February 13, 2018

8.07.18

2018.09.05

1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked. The defendant shall revoke the judgment of the first instance on September 28, 2016. The imposition of the total amount of 513,896,150 won (including additional taxes), the total amount of 232,898,890 won (including additional taxes), the total amount of 232,898,890 won (including additional taxes), the total amount of 31,785,598,50 won (including additional taxes), the total amount of 1,785, 50 won (hereinafter referred to as "Plaintiff") to the plaintiff PPP on September 28, 2016, and the total amount of 30 won (including 1,785, 598, 50 won) to the plaintiff corporation (hereinafter referred to as "Plaintiff") and the total amount of 201 to 2016, the 201 to 2016, the 2601 to 2016, each of the additional taxes for each business year 2016

1. Quotation, etc. of judgment in the first instance;

This Court's reasoning is as follows, from the 5th 3th eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth g eth eth eth eth e

In the appellate court of June 1, 2018 (U.S. District Court 2018No**), New A was sentenced to the suspension of execution for six months, and the Plaintiff SS was sentenced to a fine of KRW 20 million, and the appeal by MaM, newD and Plaintiff PP was dismissed, and the final appeal (Supreme Court 2018Do****) is continuing.

2. Supplement and addition of judgments;

The plaintiffs asserts as follows. The plaintiffs asserted that the demand of Egypt Practice GB, thisCC, and the company, which are in the position of transaction Gap, paid money to them as a result of their false remarks that they would cause damages to them, and thus, the expenses that were paid in violation of social order cannot be deemed as expenses that were paid in violation of social order. Moreover, since KimB and thisCC paid money to them from the plaintiffs' standpoint, it is not a tax invoice actually false, but a tax invoice related thereto is not a tax invoice, and even in relation to corporate tax evasion and value-added tax evasion, it is not a corporate tax evasion or evasion. Furthermore, the money paid to KimB and thisCC is the expenses paid to the company for its business, and the other party KimB and thisCC, as well as those related to the business, are aimed at facilitating smooth transactional relations by enhancing friendship with business partners.

However, according to the facts acknowledged in the judgment of the court of first instance as cited by the court of first instance, each of the tax invoices of this case shall be deemed as a processing tax invoice issued without supplying goods or services. Even if the plaintiffs were inevitably issued each of the tax invoices of this case, the supply value of each of the above tax invoices shall not be deducted from the input tax amount, and since the plaintiffs' net assets are not reduced through such processing transaction, the amount shall not be deemed as losses, and the rebates paid to the employees of Emart shall not be deemed as ordinary expenses generally recognized as expenses paid in violation of social order. In addition, in light of the payment process and purpose, the portion provided to KimB and thisCC among the respective processing pay of this case cannot be deemed as ordinary expenses, even if the plaintiffs were inevitably disbursed for the purpose of receiving the business. In this regard, since the plaintiffs were found guilty as a crime of breach of trust in a criminal case, the Plaintiffs cannot be included in the deductible expenses under any pretext, including entertainment expenses and sales incidental expenses, as the plaintiffs submitted additionally by this court (No evidence No. 15 No. 12).

3. Conclusion

If so, the plaintiffs' claims shall be dismissed in its entirety due to the lack of reasonable grounds. The judgment of the court of first instance with the same conclusion is just, and the plaintiffs' appeal is without merit, and all of them