The reservation disposition is legitimate since the settlement of accounts has been changed to the provisional payment before the correction.

It is reasonable to dispose of as reservation because the cash was leaked through the initial processing, but it was changed to the representative's provisional payment through the change of the settlement of accounts before the correction.

Article 67 of the Corporate Tax Act

Suwon District Court 2015Guhap2919 global income and revocation thereof

BAA

BB Director of the Tax Office

June 29, 2016

August 17, 2016

1. The Defendant’s imposition of KRW 109,329,860 of global income tax for the year 2007 against the Plaintiff on May 1, 2014 shall be revoked.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

Cheong-gu Office

The same is as the order (the date of the disposition of the plaintiff's written complaint on May 13, 2014 seems to be a clerical error).

1. Details of the disposition;

A. CCC Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “CCC”) was established on December 9, 199 for the purpose of geological survey and exploration service on June 5, 2009, and was closed down on June 5, 2009, and Korea-Japan served as the representative director from the time of its establishment to October 18, 2007. The Plaintiff was employed as the representative director of the non-party company from February 19, 2007 to October 19, 2007.

B. 1) On March 27, 2009, upon filing a corporate tax return for the business year of 2008, the non-party company considered 1,397,105,527 won, which was omitted in the account book as at the end of 2007, as the provisional payment amount for DaD and disposed of as a bonus for GaD. On June 8, 2009, 1,235,450,639 won as the bonus for GaD and the remainder 161,654,88 won as it is as it is, and the revised return was filed to dispose of it as a reservation. Specific details of 1,235,450,639 won are as follows.

2) Of the above details, the parts directly related to the instant case are The portions related to the instant case are

C. On October 4, 2010, the representative director of the company other than the lawsuit filed a request for pre-assessment review on the ground that it is unreasonable to dispose of income belonging to the company other than the lawsuit as a bonus to the company itself after the change from the representative director of the company other than the lawsuit to the plaintiff. Accordingly, the head of the EE tax office sent a reply to the FF director of the EF to "the date when the disposal of income, such as provisional payment, ceases to exist between the non-party company and the Korea-China, because the time when the disposal of income, such as the non-party company's bonus, is the date when the special relationship between the non-party company and the Korea-China ceases to exist."

D. The head of the FF Tax Office, from September 8, 201 to September 27, 201, conducted a partial investigation of corporate tax on the non-party company for the purpose of attribution of income related to bonus income disposal, classification and determination of income attribution period (hereinafter referred to as "tax investigation of this case"), as shown in the attached Table 2 [Attachment 2], to which non-party company's representative director is changed as of October 19, 207, 695,054,000 won and its recognition and 34,49,000 won, 220,00,000,000 won and 20,000,000 won and 20,000,000 won and 20,000,000 won and 20,000 won and 20,000 won and 20,000 won and 207,00,00 won and 20,00 won and 07,0.

E. On December 12, 2011, the FF Director notified the non-party company of the results of the instant tax investigation, and the non-party company requested a pre-assessment review but dismissed on January 18, 2012.

F. On February 1, 2012, as indicated in [Attachment 2] attached Table 2, the head of the FF Tax Office adjusted the income amount of the non-party company for the business year 2007 and the business year 2007 of the non-party company for the business year 2008 to correct the amount of 106,693,470 won for the corporate tax of the non-party company for the business year 2008, and revised the amount of 106,693,470 won for the corporate tax of the non-party company for the business year 2008 to correct the amount of 949,53,294 won for the income amount belonging to the year 207, the notice of the change in income amount for 201,975,000 won for the plaintiff for the income amount belonging to the year 207, and the notice of the change in income amount for 100,000,000 won for the plaintiff

G. The Defendant against the Plaintiff on May 1, 2014 in accordance with the content of notice of change in the amount of income to the Plaintiff.

In 207, the global income tax of KRW 109,329,860 was imposed (hereinafter referred to as the "instant disposition").

H. The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an objection with the director of the tax office BB on July 8, 2014, but was dismissed on August 11, 2014. The Plaintiff filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal on November 10, 2014, but was dismissed on July 9, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 8, Gap evidence 11-2, Eul evidence 1 to 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The instant disposition was made based on the wrongful disposal of the FF Director’s income as follows. Therefore, it is unlawful.

1) As to the funds of this case

The non-party company is likely to reduce the credit assessment of the non-party company because the provisional payment paid to Han-do representative director D at the time of the business year 2007 is too much so high that the credit assessment of the non-party company might be reduced. The separate account statement 129,920,000 won in processed cash during the period, such as the statement in the separate account statement 1. A. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 2. 2007, after the non-party company introduced the processed cash amount of 129,920,000 won as the collection of provisional payment, and the above processed cash payment was paid on November 29, 2007. 1. 2. 1. 2. 1. 1. 1. 2. 1. 1. 1. 1. 20 . . . 20 . . 1. 20 . . 1. 20 . . 20 . . 1. 20 . . . . . . . . . . 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

In the above accounting process, the cash amount of KRW 151,975,00 was not leaked out of the private company. Even if the money was leaked, it was found that the non-party company intended to recover the money by appropriating it as the provisional payment through the above revised accounting process. Thus, it was erroneous for the FF superintendent of the tax office to dispose of the money of this case as the bonus to the plaintiff, not the "in-house reserve" in the business year 2007.

2) As to the amount of money of this case:

On December 17, 2007, the non-party company received the lease deposit of KRW 50,000,000 from the claimant corporation as stated in the "Subdivision No. 1 Accounting Report No. 2, 2007." The non-party company accounted for the collection of the lease deposit of KRW 50,000,000 as it collected the provisional payment, and conducted a revised accounting settlement to return it on January 1, 2008. The non-party company did not waive the claim for the provisional payment to be recovered from the representative director, but did not pay the amount of KRW 50,000,000 for the purpose of temporarily less the provisional payment. Thus, it was erroneous that the FF director disposed of the amount of the non-party share of KRW 50,00 as bonus to the plaintiff not "in the internal reserve" in the business year 2007.

B. Determination

1) Where a corporation fails to enter its sales in the account book despite a fact of sales or appropriates the cost of processing in the account book, barring any special circumstance, the corporation’s profit equivalent to the omitted sales or the amount of the cost of processing shall be deemed to have been leaked out, barring any special circumstance. In such cases, the special circumstance that the total amount omitted sales, etc. is not leaked out, shall be verified by the claimant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Du4053, Nov. 29, 2012).

2) Determination as to the funds of this case

(1) On the 207 business year and 208 business year, the non-party company's accounting records were 10G 20,000 won and 20G 20,000 won and 9G 20,000 won and 9G 20,000 won and 9G 20,000 won and 20,000 won and 9G 20,000 won and 9G 20,000,000 won and 9,000 won and 20,000 won and 9G 20,000,000 won and 9G 20,000,000 won and 9,000 won and 20,00 won and 9,000 won and 20,000 won and 9,00 won and 207,00 won and 9,00 won and 207,00,00 won and 207,0.

B) In addition adjustment of the above provisional payment amounting to KRW 129,920,00, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the plaintiff was paid KRW 129,920,000 in cash during the period of 2007 as claimed by the plaintiff, and there is no evidence to acknowledge that the plaintiff was paid the provisional payment amounting to KRW 129,920,00 in cash during the period of 207. Thus, the settlement of accounts based on the premise that the provisional payment was paid KRW 129,920,00 in cash is not acceptable. Thus, the disposition of income following the additional adjustment of the above provisional payment should be determined based on whether the cash amounting to KRW 129,920,000,000, which was deposited on November 29, 2007, was leaked outside the company on the premise of collection.

In light of the above facts, the non-party company accounts for the increase of the provisional payment amount of KRW 129,920,000 on January 1, 2008, and the total amount of KRW 129,920,000 on January 9, 2008. However, there is no evidence to prove that the non-party company paid the provisional payment amount of KRW 129,920,00 on each of the above dates to the plaintiff who is the representative director at the time of the above date. The above total amount is reasonable to view that the non-party company paid the cash amount of KRW 129,920,00 on November 29, 200 ( KRW 129,920,00) and the amount of KRW 129,920,00 on January 9, 200 and KRW 20 on the basis that it is very close to the original amount of the construction price paid to GG engineering ( KRW 129,920,00).

3) Judgment on the amount of money of this case

A) As indicated in the separate sheet No. 2. Report No. 1 of the accounting process of the non-party company's separate accounts, the non-party company collected KRW 50,000,000 on December 17, 2007 by cash and collected KRW 50,000,000 on January 1, 2008, and accounted for a decrease of KRW 50,000,000 on the provisional payment as well as KRW 50,00,000 on December 17, 207. Thus, it is the correct accounting that the portion of KRW 50,00,000 as the provisional payment was recovered on December 17, 207 is the amount of KRW 1.0,000,000,000,000 on the provisional payment as the lease deposit, and the amount of KRW 50,000,000,000 on the separate payment of KRW 50,000 (property adjustment).

B) We examine the above provisional payments of KRW 50,000,000 as well as disposal of income following the additional adjustment.

On January 1, 2008, the above facts are as follows: (a) Nonparty Company paid to the representative director on January 1, 2008 the provisional payment of KRW 50,000,000,000; and (b) there is no evidence to prove that Nonparty Company paid the provisional payment equivalent to the above amount to the Plaintiff, the representative director at the time of the above date; (c) the above amount is the same as the amount that Nonparty Company collected KRW 50,000,000,000 from the initial deposit in cash; and (d) it is reasonable to view the other party’s account as the provisional payment deposit that is not cash or deposit, and it is very close to the time of December 17, 2007 as the additional payment of KRW 0,000,000,000,000, which is substantially a 000,0000,0000,0000,0000,000,000.

4) Sub-determination

Since the FF Director's disposition of the money of this case as bonus to the plaintiff is erroneous, the disposition of this case on the premise that it is unlawful.

3. Conclusion

The plaintiff's claim is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition.