Whether the notice of change in the amount of income falls under a bankruptcy estate claim where it has arrived after bankruptcy is declared.

If the notice of change in the amount of income has arrived after the declaration of bankruptcy, corporate tax claims and resident tax claims to be withheld therefrom do not constitute bankruptcy estate claims established after the declaration of bankruptcy.

Article 38 of the Bankruptcy Act (Scope of Estate Claims)

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

The defendants' grounds of appeal are also examined.

Article 38 subparagraph 2 of the former Bankruptcy Act (repealed by Article 2 of the Addenda to the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act, Act No. 7428 of March 31, 2005, hereinafter referred to as the "Bankruptcy Act") provides that the issue of whether a corporate tax constitutes an estate claim shall be determined based on whether the taxation requirements prescribed by the Acts are met before the declaration of bankruptcy before the declaration of bankruptcy, and the taxation claims are established. Where the tax authority disposes of the omitted corporate income as the representative recognized and notifies the change in the amount of income, the liability to pay corporate tax shall be established at the time of delivery of the notice of change in the amount of income to the relevant corporation and the liability to pay corporate tax, which is the tax base of the withheld corporate tax, shall be established at the time of the establishment of the bankruptcy estate. Thus, the judgment of the court below is justifiable in light of the legal principles on the amount of corporate tax to be withheld and resident tax to be established after the declaration of bankruptcy, and it does not constitute an error in the law as to the estate claim under Article 38 subparagraph 2 of the Bankruptcy Act.

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

* Reference Data

High Court Decision 2004Na42076 ( December 02, 2004)

All appeals by the defendants are dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendants.

1. Purport of claim

Each tax claim in the attached list 1 and 2 imposed by the defendant Republic of Korea on ○○○○, a bankrupt corporation, and each tax claim in the attached list 3 and 4 imposed by the defendant Seoul Special Metropolitan City on ○○○, a bankrupt corporation, shall be confirmed not to belong to estate claims and bankruptcy claims against the bankrupt corporation ○○○, a bankrupt corporation.

2. Purport of appeal

The part of the judgment of the first instance against the Defendants shall be revoked. The Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendants shall be dismissed in entirety.

1. Scope of judgment on party members;

The court of the first instance sentenced the plaintiff's winning judgment on the grounds that the attached list 2, 4 tax claims do not belong to the estate claims and bankruptcy claims against the bankrupt corporation ○○○○○○○, and sentenced the plaintiff's losing judgment on the grounds that the attached list 1, 3 tax claims belong to the estate claims against the bankrupt corporation ○○○○○○, the bankrupt corporation. Since only the defendants appealed against the judgment of the first instance court as to the attached list 2, 4 tax claims, the attached list 1, 3 tax claims are finalized, and therefore the party members are limited to the attached list 2, 4 tax claims.

2. Basic facts

(Reasons for Recognition: Facts without dispute, entry in Gap 1 through 5, Eul 1 through 12 (including documentary evidence attached with each number), the whole purport of the pleadings.

A. On October 2002, 2002, ○○○○ (hereinafter “○○○○”) was declared bankrupt by the Seoul District Court on December 24, 2002, and the Plaintiff was appointed as bankruptcy trustee on the same day.

B. After conducting a tax investigation with respect to ○○○○○, Defendant Republic of Korea found items classified as loans to the representative director as a result of a tax investigation with respect to ○○○○○○○○○○, and around May 2003, when determining the tax base and tax amount of corporate tax for the business year 2001, Defendant Republic of Korea disposed of 2 billion won, which was classified as loans to ○○○○○○○○, as bonus for the representative director, in the process of determining the tax base and tax amount of corporate tax for the business year 2002 against ○○○○○○○○○, and notified changes in each income amount.

C. However, the Plaintiff did not pay the amount of withholding tax on wage and salary income (hereinafter referred to as “each wage and salary income tax of this case”) upon the above notice of change in income amount by the statutory due date (10 days following the receipt of the notice). Accordingly, on June 11, 2003, the Defendant Republic of Korea imposed on the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 819,553,90 for wage and salary income tax of 2001 (the original tax) and KRW 3,962,110,186 for wage and salary income tax of 202, as shown in attached Table 2.

D. Meanwhile, as shown in attached Table 4.4., Defendant Seoul Special Metropolitan City imposed the resident tax (hereinafter “E”) based on the wage and salary income tax (cost tax) in attached Table 2.1. in attached Table 2.1.

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff's assertion

Each of the earned income taxes of this case, after the bankruptcy of ○○○, is declared, is subject to withholding after the bankruptcy is declared, since a certain amount is disposed of as a bonus to the representative director of the corporation and the withholding tax is imposed following the notification of change in income amount. The resident tax of this case based on the earned income tax of this case is also incidental after the bankruptcy of ○○○○○○, and each of the earned income tax and resident tax of this case does not accrue to the bankruptcy foundation. Accordingly, each of the earned income taxes and resident tax of this case does not constitute estate claims and bankruptcy claims

B. The defendants' assertion

Article 38 of the Bankruptcy Act shall be interpreted to mean that there exists only the fact that a taxation claim exists before a declaration of bankruptcy is declared, and that there is no need to establish a taxation claim. In this regard, each of the wage and salary income tax and resident tax of this case has already existed in 2001 and 2002, which are the business year of the pertinent wage and salary income tax, so each of the wage and salary income tax of this case and resident tax of this case constitutes estate claim, and even if it does not constitute a domestic estate claim, it constitutes a bankruptcy claim.

3. Determination

(a) The scope of estate claims and bankruptcy claims;

(1) Relevant provisions

○ Definition of Bankruptcy Claim Article 14 of the Bankruptcy Act

Any claim on property against the bankrupt arising before the bankruptcy is declared, shall be a bankruptcy claim.

Article 38 of the Bankruptcy Act, the scope of estate claims

The following claims shall be regarded as estate claims:

2. Claims that can be collected according to the example of the National Tax Collection Act or the collection of national taxes, and claims based on causes arising after bankruptcy is declared, shall be limited to those arising against the bankrupt estate; and

(2) According to the above provisions, in order to become a foundation claim, a claim for taxation is a claim for a cause arising before the declaration of bankruptcy or a claim for a cause arising after the declaration of bankruptcy should arise with respect to the bankrupt estate. In this context, even if a taxation claim is not specifically determined by the taxation disposition procedure of the tax authority or the payment period is not necessary before the declaration of bankruptcy is made, it is reasonable to interpret that a taxation claim constitutes an abstract tax liability upon meeting the taxation requirements of each tax law

In addition, if each taxation claim of this case is deemed to be a claim due to a cause before bankruptcy is declared, it shall be recognized as an estate claim pursuant to Article 38 subparagraph 2 of the Bankruptcy Act, but if not, it shall not constitute a bankruptcy claim pursuant to Article 14 of the Bankruptcy Act.

B. Determination on each of the wage and salary income taxes of this case (attached Table 2.)

(i)the relevant provisions;

Article 21 of the Framework Act on National Taxes: Time when tax liability becomes effective

(2) Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (1), the obligation to pay the following national taxes shall accrue at the following time:

1. For the income or corporate tax withheld, when the income or income amount is paid; and

Article 135 (Fictitious Payment Date of Income Tax Act)

(4) Any bonus disposed of under the Corporate Tax Act shall be deemed paid on the date determined by the Presidential Decree.

○ Dividend under the disposal of income pursuant to Article 192 of the Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act. Deemed the time of payment of bonus and other income

(1) In determining or correcting the corporate income amount under the Corporate Tax Act, any dividend disposed of by the head of a tax office or the director of a regional tax office under the Corporate Tax Act; any bonus and other income shall be notified to the corporation concerned by a notice on change of income amount as determined by the Ordinance of the Ministry of Finance and Economy within 15 days from the date of the determination

(2) In cases under paragraph (1), the relevant dividends, leisure and other income shall be deemed paid or recovered on the date when the relevant notice is received.

(2) The establishment time of each of the wage and salary income tax in this case

(A) According to the above provisions, in the case of the disposal of income under the Corporate Tax Act, the corporation is deemed to pay bonus to the beneficiary as it is from the date when the corporation received the notice of change in the amount of income resulting from the disposition of bonus. Accordingly, the corporation's obligation to collect and pay the recipient's Class A labor income tax shall be deemed to be established on the date when the recipient received the notice

In each of the instant wage and salary income taxes, it cannot be deemed that the income subject to taxation has been realized at the end of each business year in which the representative director was recognized, and above all, there is no ground to acknowledge the existence of income subject to taxation before the income is disposed of in the establishment of the tax claim by income disposal (see Supreme Court Decision 92Nu4048, Jul. 14, 1992). In that sense, the Plaintiff’s obligation to withhold taxes should be deemed to have been established on the date of receipt of the notice of change in income amount.

Therefore, the tax liability of each of the earned income tax in this case was established on the date of receiving the notice of change in the pertinent income amount, and it is apparent that each of the above notice of change in income amount was made on or after December 24, 2002, which was after the date of the bankruptcy declaration of ○○○○○○○, and therefore, each of the instant earned income tax in this case is a tax claim due to a cause after the bankruptcy is declared, and it does not constitute estate claim and bankruptcy claim.

(B) On this basis, the Defendants asserted to the effect that each of the instant wage and salary income tax was imposed on the basis of the fact that each of the instant wage and salary income tax was appropriated by the ○○○○○ representative director, and thus, the taxation requirement of each of the instant income tax was established when the representative director useful funds, and accordingly, that each of the instant income tax constitutes estate claims or at least bankruptcy claims, as long as the use of funds was incurred

"To do so, as seen above, tax liability is established at the time of paying the amount of income. The bonus disposed of under the Corporate Tax Act is deemed to have been paid on the date of receiving the notice of change in the amount of income. In the establishment of the tax claim under the Corporate Tax Act, there is no ground for recognizing the existence of the income subject to taxation before the disposition of income is made. As to the non-existent income, there is no ground for recognizing the existence of the income subject to taxation as well as the income tax liability due to the occurrence of income. Therefore, in the withholding income tax, the fact of taxation requirement in the withholding income tax is deemed to be the "payment of the income amount (receiving the notice of change in the amount of income in the case of the income disposal under the Corporate Tax Act)". "Although each of the above taxes is based on the use of funds by the representative director, which occurred prior to the bankruptcy of ○○○○○○○, the fact that the income was appropriated was immediately paid on the basis of the fact that the income amount was paid on the date of receiving the notice of change in amount, and it cannot be deemed as useful until the payment of income amount of each business year.

Therefore, it is reasonable to view that the taxation requirement of each income tax of this case is not satisfied when the representative director uses funds, but at the same time when the plaintiff receives the notice of change in income amount under the income tax-related laws and regulations, and simultaneously the tax liability is established. Therefore, the defendants' assertion that the representative director's use of funds is a

C. Determination on the resident tax of this case (attached Form 4.)

(1) Relevant provisions

○ Time when tax liability Article 29 of the Local Tax Act is established

(1) The obligation to pay the local taxes shall accrue at the following times:

4. Resident tax;

(b)pro rata income: income tax, corporate tax, or agricultural income tax, which serves as the tax base thereof, at the time when the tax liability becomes effective (s).

(2) Time when resident tax of this case is established

The resident tax of this case imposed on the Plaintiff by the Defendant Seoul Special Metropolitan City is based on the labor income tax as set forth in the attached Table 2.1., which is its tax base, and it is established after ○○○○○○’s declaration of bankruptcy and does not constitute estate claims or bankruptcy claims. Therefore, the resident tax of this case does not constitute estate claims and bankruptcy claims.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, each of the wage and salary income taxes of this case (attached Form 2) and the resident tax of this case (attached Form 4.) do not belong to estate claims and bankruptcy claims against the bankrupt corporation ○○○○○○○, Inc., and as long as the defendants deal with them, the plaintiff has the interest to seek confirmation. As such, the plaintiff's claim of this case against the defendants is justified, and this conclusion is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition by the court of first instance.

List 1.

1. Occasional corporate tax for the year 2002, which was imposed on January 21, 2003, KRW 153,635,320 and its additional dues; and

2. Value-added tax for the second period of 2 years, which was imposed on June 1, 2003, 42,203,286 won and its additional dues.

List 2.

1. Earned income tax (original tax) for the year 200 which was imposed on June 11, 2001 in accordance with the notice of the change in the amount of income on May 2003 (the date of notification of the change in the amount of income in the year 2001), and the additional dues;

2.3,962,110,180 Won and its additional charges imposed on June 11, 2003 by the notification of the change in the amount of income on May 11, 2003 (in the year 2002)

List 3.

1. Occasional corporate tax of 153,635,320 won which was imposed on January 21, 2003 and resident tax of 9,074,880 won and its additional dues;

2. Resident tax 1,814,970 won and its additional dues based on the additional tax on the occasional corporate tax for the year 2002, which was imposed on January 21, 2003.

List 4.

Resident tax of 1,767,960 won and its additional dues imposed on June 11, 2001 in accordance with the notice of change in the amount of income (the amount of income in 2001) on around May 203, 203.

(Last)

* Reference Data

China District Court Decision 2003Gaz. 85833 (O. 27, 2004)

1. A. Between the Plaintiff and the Defendant Republic of Korea, it is confirmed that each earned income tax in the attached Table 2 attached hereto imposed by the Defendant Republic of Korea on ○○○○○, a bankrupt corporation, does not belong to the estate claim against the said bankrupt and the bankruptcy claim.

B. It is confirmed that between the Plaintiff and Defendant Seoul Special Metropolitan City, resident tax in attached Table 4 imposed by Defendant Seoul Special Metropolitan City on ○○○○○○○, Inc., the bankrupt does not belong to estate claims against the bankrupt and bankruptcy claims.

2. The plaintiff's remaining claims against the defendants are dismissed.

3. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Defendants.

The judgment as referred to in Paragraph (1) and Paragraph (1) of this Article and each taxation claim in the attached Table 1 that the defendant Republic of Korea imposed on the bankrupt corporation ○○○○○○, Inc. and each taxation claim in the attached Table 3 that the defendant Seoul Special Metropolitan City imposed on the bankrupt corporation ○○○, Inc., shall be confirmed, respectively, does not belong

1. Basic facts

(Ground for recognition: In the absence of dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to Gap evidence 5 (including each number), entry of Eul evidence 1 to Eul evidence 12 (including each number), each entry of Eul evidence of 1 to Eul evidence of 12, the purport of the whole pleadings

A. On December 24, 2002, 2002, ○○○○ (hereinafter “○○○”) was declared bankrupt by the Seoul District Court, and the Defendant was appointed as bankruptcy trustee on the same day.

(b) The ○○○○○○ on October 2002, a person who defaulted on the part of the deceased; and

(1) On January 21, 2003, pursuant to Article 68 of the Corporate Tax Act and Article 108 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, Defendant Republic of Korea shall determine the amount of KRW 912,891,50 as an occasional amount of corporate tax imposed for the year 2002. After having notified the subsequent tax investigation, ○○○ (○○) discovered that the technology development reserve funds or business losses reserve funds accumulated in the year 1999, 200, and 201 were returned in a lump sum due to the closure of business, and determined the amount equivalent to the interest accrued to the said reserve as an additional tax to restore the amount of corporate tax reduced due to the subsidization at the time of accumulating the reserve fund, and determined the amount equivalent to the interest accrued to the said additional tax as an additional tax to be paid for the purpose of restoring the amount of corporate tax reduced according to the subsidization at the time of accumulating the reserve fund, and ultimately, determined the amount of corporate tax to be imposed as an occasional amount of corporate tax to be imposed as indicated in Schedule 1535,320

(2) On October 25, 2002, Defendant Republic of Korea withheld the decision on the return of value-added tax and the application for refund for which was scheduled at ○○○○○ on October 25, 2002, and determined KRW 3,352,850, value-added tax for 2002 as an occasional assessment on January 21, 2003 on the ground of default. After conducting a tax investigation thereafter, Defendant Republic of Korea discovered that ○○○○ received input tax deduction by using the processed tax transaction account statement at the time of filing the second preliminary return on February 2002, and based on the above processed purchase tax amount, Defendant Republic of Korea determined and imposed the said amount as stated in attached Table 1-2, as KRW 42,203,286 on June 1, 2003, taking into account the above processed purchase tax amount.

C. In addition, Defendant Republic of Korea finds out items classified as loans to the representative director as a result of the tax investigation on ○○○○, and around May 2003.

(1) During the process of determining the tax base and amount of corporate tax for the business year 2001 on ○○○○, two billion won, which was classified as a loan to the representative director Kim○, was disposed of as a bonus to the representative director;

(2) During the process of determining the tax base and amount of corporate tax for the business year 2002 against ○○○○, 9.8 billion won as bonus for the representative director, who was classified as loans to ○○○○○, was disposed of as a bonus, and notified of each change in income

(3) On June 11, 2003, the Plaintiff did not pay to the Plaintiff a statutory due date (the tenth day of the following month after receipt of a notice) the amount of withholding tax on wage and salary income pursuant to the notice of change in the above income amount (hereinafter referred to as the "amount of withholding tax on wage and salary income"), and the Defendant Republic of Korea imposed respectively the amount of KRW 819,53,90 for wage and salary income tax (the original tax) accrued in 2001 and the amount of KRW 3,962,110,186 for wage and salary income tax (the original tax) accrued in 202, as shown in attached Table 2.

D. On the other hand, the defendant Seoul Special Metropolitan City imposed the above corporate tax, its additional tax, and resident tax based on the wage and salary income tax, as shown in the attached list 3 and 4.

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The plaintiff asserts that all of the corporate tax, value-added tax, wage and salary tax, and each resident tax based on them were imposed after the bankruptcy declaration ○○○○○ was not related to the bankruptcy foundation, and therefore, it does not constitute estate claims and bankruptcy claims.

In other words, both corporate tax and value-added tax are all tax claims that occurred after the bankruptcy was declared as notified to the plaintiff on January 20, 2003, which was after the bankruptcy was declared. In particular, since earned income tax is disposed of as a bonus for the representative director of the corporation and imposed the withholding tax upon the notice of change in income amount when revising the corporate tax base after the bankruptcy was declared as ○○○○○○, and the tax claims are clear that the tax liability becomes effective after

B. The defendants' assertion

Accordingly, Defendant Republic of Korea should interpret that the right to claims under Article 38 of the Bankruptcy Act prior to the declaration of bankruptcy exists only when there exists only the taxation cause of a tax claim prior to the declaration of bankruptcy, and that there is no need to establish a tax claim. In this regard, Defendant Republic of Korea asserts that the taxation cause of each of the above wage and salary income tax is an estate claim, since each of the above wage and salary income tax has already existed in 2001 and 2002, which is the business year of the pertinent wage and salary income tax, and that the corporate tax and value-added tax constitute an estate claim, and it is clear that there was a tax cause prior

The Seoul Special Metropolitan City also claims the same corporate tax and wage and salary income tax as the Republic of Korea, which are the basis for imposing each resident tax above.

3. Determination

A. The issues of the instant case

(1) Relevant provisions

○ Definition of Bankruptcy Claim Article 14 of the Bankruptcy Act

Any claim on property against the bankrupt arising before the bankruptcy is declared, shall be a bankruptcy claim.

Article 38 of the Bankruptcy Act, the scope of estate claims

The following claims shall be regarded as estate claims:

2. Claims that can be collected according to the example of the National Tax Collection Act or the collection of national taxes, and claims arising from causes after bankruptcy is declared, shall be limited to those arising against the bankrupt estate; and

(2) Therefore, in order for a taxation claim to become a estate claim under the Bankruptcy Act, if it is a claim for a cause arising before and after the declaration of bankruptcy or a claim for a cause arising after the declaration of bankruptcy, it should be deemed that it

However, it is clear that each of the instant taxation claims imposed on the Plaintiff does not fall under this point because the tax claims of this case are imposed on the Plaintiff, because it is the fact that the assets belonging to the bankrupt property are owned or the assets are transferred or disposed of, or the taxation is imposed on the profit itself, and therefore, the issue is whether each of the instant taxation claims is attributable to the cause before the bankruptcy is declared (where it is recognized that the claim due to the cause prior to the declaration of bankruptcy is a claim due to the cause prior to the declaration of bankruptcy, the instant taxation claim of this case is recognized as an estate claim pursuant to Article 38 subparagraph 2 of the Bankruptcy Act, but if not, it does not constitute a bankruptcy claim pursuant

B. The meaning of taxation claims due to reasons before bankruptcy is declared

As to the meaning of a taxation claim due to a cause before bankruptcy is declared, the plaintiff shall interpret the meaning of a taxation claim before the declaration of bankruptcy is made. However, the defendant asserts that it is sufficient to interpret the meaning of a taxation claim, which is the cause of a taxation claim, before the declaration of bankruptcy is declared, and that it is not necessary to establish a taxation claim.

On the other hand, most of the taxation claims are established at the same time as the taxation requirements or acts that are the basis thereof arise, and at the same time, the tax liability is not established immediately because the income or transactions have occurred in the period of taxation such as corporate tax or value-added tax, but only at the end of the taxable period. In order to file a claim for specific performance of the taxation claims, the State must go through a series of processes to determine specific taxation rights, such as the taxpayer's filing act or the disposition of the tax authority, but once the taxation requirements under the above tax laws are met, the abstract tax liability itself is legally established as a matter of course. As such, the tax laws and regulations must focus on the request for legal stability when establishing the requirements and limitations of the tax liability as a norm of infringement. The interpretation should be strictly interpreted in its interpretation, and it is not permitted to interpret the provisions of the above taxation claims by analogical interpretation or expand the administrative convenience by analogical interpretation as stated in the law, and Article 38 subparagraph 2 of the Bankruptcy Act does not require the establishment of the taxation claims provisions prior to the date of bankruptcy.

Based on such principle of interpretation, this paper will examine the following various taxation claims in detail.

C. Determination on the corporate tax of this case (attached Form 1-1)

(i)the relevant provisions;

Article 21 of the Framework Act on National Taxes

(1) A liability to pay national taxes shall accrue at the following times:

1. For income tax or corporate tax, when the taxable period is terminated (s) ;

(2) Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (1), the obligation to pay the following national taxes shall accrue at the following time:

4. For a national tax collected by occasional assessment, when the cause for such occasional assessment occurs (s).

○ Article 8(1)3 of the Corporate Tax Act

(1) Where a domestic corporation is dissolved (excluding dissolution due to merger, division, or merger after division) during a business year, the period from the first day of the business year until the date of the registration of the dissolution (referring to the date of bankruptcy, etc. in cases of dissolution due to bankruptcy, and to the date of dissolution in cases of organizations deemed corporations; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the period from

Article 69 of the Corporate Tax Act: Determination of occasional assessment

(1) Where domestic corporations are likely to evade corporate tax on the grounds prescribed by Presidential Decree in the business year, the head of the district tax office having jurisdiction over the place of tax payment or the Commissioner of the competent Regional Tax Office may occasionally impose corporate tax on the corporation (hereinafter referred to as "Occasional assessment"). In such cases, he/she shall report the income for each business year pursuant to

(2) The provisions of paragraph (1) shall apply to the period of occasional assessment starting from the business year to the date on which any cause prescribed by Presidential Decree occurs.

(3) Matters necessary for occasional assessment under paragraph (1) shall be prescribed by Presidential Decree.

Article 108 of the Enforcement Decree of the Corporate Tax Act

(1) "Grounds prescribed by Presidential Decree" in Article 69 (1) and (2) of the Act means cases falling under any of the following subparagraphs:

1. Where the headquarters, etc. is moved without making a report;

2. Where the business is suspended or closed due to a slump in business or other causes; and

3. Where any other reasonable ground exists which might cause the occurrence of tax evasion.

(2) Time of establishment of the corporate tax of this case

As seen earlier, Defendant Republic of Korea imposed corporate tax on KRW 912,891,500 on January 21, 2003, which was before ○○○○○ was declared bankrupt on or around October 202, 202, once it was closed without permission, and subsequently, conducted a tax investigation, determined the amount equivalent to interest accrued from the return of reserves as corporate tax as additional tax, and subsequently determined the amount of corporate tax to be additionally imposed on the said additional tax to be imposed at KRW 153,635,320 by adding the amount of corporate tax to the amount of tax to be imposed on the said additional tax to be imposed at KRW 153,635,320.

The reason for occasional assessment as prescribed by the above Enforcement Decree before the end of the taxable period.

If it is recognized that there is a possibility of tax evasion, the tax base and tax amount shall be determined by first of all until the time of the closure of the business of ○○○, without receiving a tax base return. The liability to pay corporate tax to be imposed on an early basis is established when a cause for the occasional assessment occurs pursuant to Article 21(2)4 of the Framework Act on National Taxes. Since the reason for the occasional assessment of this case is ○○○’s closure of the business without permission, the liability to pay corporate tax has already been established on the date of closure of business

In addition, since the additional tax amount, which was imposed through the tax investigation, is due to the closure of ○○○○’s business, and the accumulated reserve has been returned to the same time, even in this case, the reason for the occasional assessment is the closure of ○○○○○, so the same applies to the time when the tax liability for this portion is established.

(3) Sub-determination

Therefore, the corporate tax of this case imposed on the Plaintiff is imposed occasionally following the closure of ○○○○○’s business, and thus, the tax liability has already been established on the cessation of ○○○○○’s business, which is the grounds for such occasional assessment. Therefore, the tax claim due to the cause prior to the

D. Determination as to the value-added tax of this case (attached Form 1-2)

(1) Relevant provisions

Article 21 of the Framework Act on National Taxes

(1) A liability to pay national taxes shall accrue at the time in the following subparagraphs:

1. For value-added tax, when a taxable period is terminated (satis omitted);

(2) Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (1), the obligation to pay the following national taxes shall come into existence at the following time:

4. For a national tax collected by occasional assessment, when the cause for such occasional assessment occurs (s).

○ Article 3 of the Value-Added Tax Act

(1) The taxable period of value-added taxes for entrepreneurs shall be as follows:

1. First period: from January 1 to June 30;

2. Second period: from July 1 to December 31.

(3) Where a business operator closes his/her business, the taxable period shall be from the commencement date of the taxable period to the cessation date of business.

○ Article 21 Revision of the Value-Added Tax Act

(1) The Commissioner of the competent Regional Tax Office or the Commissioner of the National Tax Service having jurisdiction over the place of business shall determine or correct the tax base and amount of value-added tax paid or refunded in the taxable period only where

4. Where the value-added tax may be evaded due to the causes other than those listed in subparagraphs 1 through 3 as prescribed by the Presidential Decree.

Article 23 of the Value-Added Tax Act

(2) Where an entrepreneur fails to file a preliminary return, or where there are errors or omissions in the reported details or other causes prescribed by the Presidential Decree, the head of the competent district tax office having jurisdiction over the place of business may, by applying mutatis mutandis the provisions of Article 21, determine the tax base and amount payable or refundable

○ Article 68 of the Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act.

(2) Where the reason under Article 21 (1) 4 of the Act exists, it shall be as follows:

1. When the workplace is frequently moved;

2. Where the workplace exists in an area where the workplace is deemed to move frequently;

3. Where he is under the condition of suspension or closure of business.

Article 70-2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act

Other causes as prescribed in the Presidential Decree under Article 23 (2) of the Act shall be the causes under each subparagraph of Article 68 (2).

(2) Time of establishment of the value-added tax of this case

As seen earlier, ○○○○ filed an application for refund on October 25, 2002 when filing a return of value-added tax expected to be paid on December 25, 2002. The Defendant Republic of Korea withheld it due to the nonperformance of ○○○○○○○○, but decided on January 21, 2003, value-added tax 3,352,850, which is reverted to 2002 due to the occasional assessment. After notice through a tax investigation, ○○ issued a tax investigation, the Defendant discovered that the processed tax transaction account statement among the scheduled scheduled return details of 202 was used to receive the input tax amount, and based on the above processed purchase tax amount, the said amount was determined as 42,203,286 won and imposed on June 1, 2003 (Article 21 and 23 of the Value-Added Tax Act, unlike the case of the Corporate Tax Act, it is reasonable to deem that the said amount constitutes an occasional assessment under Article 70-2 of the Framework Act.

However, the reason for the occasional assessment of value-added tax imposed on January 21, 2003 is the closure of ○○○○○○○○○○○○○, and thus, this value-added tax has already been established on the date of closedown. The reason for rectification of value-added tax imposed on the basis of the revised decision also constitutes an error or omission in the content reported on the percentage under Article 23(2) of the Value-Added Tax Act, and it is clear that the reason for such occasional assessment is earlier than the declaration of bankruptcy. Thus, the value-added tax of this case is deemed to have already been established before the declaration of bankruptcy of

(3) Sub-determination

Therefore, the value-added tax imposed on the Plaintiff constitutes estate claims with tax claims arising from the cause before bankruptcy is declared.

E. Determination on each of the wage and salary income tax of this case (attached Form 2)

(1) Relevant provisions

Article 21 of the Framework Act on National Taxes

(2) Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (1), the obligation to pay the following national taxes shall accrue at the following time:

1. For the withheld income or corporate tax, when the income or income amount is paid;

○ Article 135 of the Income Tax Act deemed as the time of payment of earned income

(4) Any bonus disposed of under the Corporate Tax Act shall be deemed paid on the date determined by the Presidential Decree.

○ Dividend from the disposal of income under Article 192 of the Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act. The date of payment of bonus and other income

(1) In determining or correcting the corporate income amount under the Corporate Tax Act, any dividend disposed of by the head of a tax office or the director of a regional tax office under the Corporate Tax Act; any bonus and other income shall be notified to the corporation concerned by a notice on change of income amount as determined by the Ordinance of the Ministry of Finance and Economy, within 15 days from the date of

(2) In cases falling under paragraph (1), the relevant dividends. Bonuses and other income shall be deemed paid or recovered from the date when the notice is received.

(2) The establishment time of each of the wage and salary income tax in this case

It is the content of each of the wage and salary income tax in this case that Defendant Republic of Korea imposes an obligation to pay the Plaintiff the withholding tax amount by disposing of a certain amount classified as a loan to the representative director as a bonus for the representative director of a corporation and giving notice of change in income amount.

In this case, only when the plaintiff receives a notice of change in the amount of income resulting from the bonus disposition pursuant to Article 21(2)1 of the Framework Act on National Taxes, Article 135(4) of the Income Tax Act, and Article 192(2) of the Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act, the plaintiff shall be deemed to pay bonus to the beneficiary only on the day when the plaintiff receives a notice of change in the amount of income resulting from the bonus disposition. Therefore, the obligation of the beneficiary to collect and pay the income tax and pay the withholding tax shall also be established on the day when the beneficiary receives the notice of change in the amount of income (see

In addition, in order to make the income subject to taxation of the Income Tax Act accrued, even if it is not necessary to realize the income in reality, at least the possibility of realizing the right to generate income should be considerably mature, and at the same stage, only the right is established, there is no income subject to taxation of the income tax. In such a case, it shall be deemed that there was no income subject to taxation at the end of each business year in which the above recognized income belongs, and above, it shall be deemed that there was no income subject to taxation before the income is disposed of, and above all, there is no ground to recognize the existence of income subject to taxation before the income is disposed of in the establishment of the tax claim based on the income disposition, and there is no ground to

(3) Sub-determination

Therefore, the tax liability of each of the earned income tax in this case was established on the date of receiving the notice of change in the pertinent income amount, and it is apparent that each of the above notice of change in income amount was made on or after December 24, 2002, which was after the date of the bankruptcy declaration of ○○○○○○○○, and therefore, each of the instant earned income tax in this case is a tax claim due to a cause after the bankruptcy is declared, and that it was not related to the bankrupt estate, and therefore, it does not constitute estate claim and bankruptcy claim.

F. Determination on each resident tax of this case (attached Table 3, 4)

(1) Relevant provisions

○ Article 29 of the Local Tax Act: Time when tax liability becomes effective

(1) A liability to pay local taxes shall accrue at the following times:

4. Resident tax;

(b) Pro rata income: Income tax that serves as the tax base thereof; and

(2) Time when each resident tax of this case was established

Among each resident tax of this case imposed on the Plaintiff by the Defendant Seoul Special Metropolitan City, the corporate tax of this case and the resident tax based on its additional tax (attached Form 4) are tax claims arising from the cause before the declaration of bankruptcy, and thus, it shall be deemed as estate claims in accordance with the relevant provisions. Since resident tax (attached Table 3) based on the amount of withholding tax on wage and salary income in the year 2001 was established after the declaration of bankruptcy, resident tax shall not be deemed as estate claims and bankruptcy claims.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, each of the above wage and salary income tax (attached Form 2) imposed by the defendant Republic of Korea on ○○○○○, a bankrupt corporation, and resident tax (attached Form 4) under the above 2001 wage and salary income tax imposed by the defendant Seoul Special Metropolitan City on ○○○○, a bankrupt corporation, does not belong to the estate claim against the above bankrupt and bankruptcy claim against the above bankrupt, and as long as the defendants are dissatisfied with such claim, it is possible to seek confirmation. Thus, the plaintiff's claim against the defendants of this case against the defendants of this case is accepted within the above scope of recognition as reasonable, and it is dismissed as it is so decided as per Disposition

List 1

1. Occasional corporate tax for the year 2002, which was imposed on January 21, 2003, KRW 153,635,320 and its additional dues; and

2. The value-added tax for the second period of February 2002, which was imposed on June 1, 2003, as well as the additional dues thereto.

(In the case of paragraph (1) above, since the tax imposition disposition was corrected, it shall be deemed that the original disposition exists within the scope of the reduction, and the date of imposition shall comply with the original disposition and the amount of tax shall be indicated according to the remaining portion. In the case of paragraph (2), since the tax imposition disposition was corrected, it shall be deemed to exist only after the subsequent disposition, and the tax amount shall be indicated

List 2

1. Wage and salary income tax (original tax) for the year 200, imposed on June 11, 2001 in accordance with the notice of the change in the amount of income on May 203, 200, and additional dues thereto;

2. Earned income tax for the year 202, which was imposed on June 11, 2003 according to the notice of the change in the amount of income on May 11, 2003 (the 2002 portion), as well as the additional dues.

List 3

1. Occasional corporate tax of 153,635,320 won which was imposed on January 21, 2003 and resident tax of 9,074,880 won and its additional dues;

2. Resident tax 1,814,970 won and the additional dues thereon, based on the additional tax for the occasional corporate tax for the year 2002, which was imposed on January 21, 2003.

List 4

1. Resident tax 1,767,960 won and its additional dues imposed on June 11, 2003 by notification of the change in the amount of income on May 2003 (the portion of year 2001);