In case where a company has ratified the disposal of the company's property by a single shareholder and a director, whether such disposal belongs to the company's revenue from the disposal price (affirmative)

If one-person shareholder and a director of a company who are de facto controlling the company, dispose of the company's property, and if the company ratified it, the effect of such disposal shall be limited to the company, and the proceeds from the disposal shall revert to the

Article 9(2) of the Corporate Tax Act, Article 12(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act

Supreme Court Decision 82Nu518 decided Jun. 26, 1984 (Gong1984,1353) 85Nu583 decided Nov. 12, 1985 (Gong1986,62) 87Nu826 decided Nov. 24, 1987 (Gong198,192)

[Defendant-Appellant] Defendant 1 and 3 others

Head of Western Tax Office

Seoul High Court Decision 91Gu6278 delivered on October 9, 1992

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

1. Judgment on the ground of appeal No. 1 by the Plaintiff’s attorney

The court below acknowledged that, until May 14, 190, Nonparty 1, a real shareholder of the Plaintiff Company, was the representative director of the Plaintiff Company and thereafter was the representative director of the Plaintiff Company, through Nonparty 2 or Nonparty 3, etc., who was appointed as the representative director of the Plaintiff Company, and transferred the management and operation rights of 26 of the Plaintiff Company to Nonparty 4, etc. using the official seal of the representative director of the Plaintiff Company. Since the sale and purchase of the Plaintiff Company was legally prohibited and it is impossible for the Plaintiff to transfer ownership in the future, the court below concluded a formal contract for transferring the Plaintiff Company's shares to 214 shares per 14 shares for each 1 cab for convenience, and thereafter confirmed the transfer contract of the Plaintiff Company's management right as above by the Plaintiff Company, if the Plaintiff Company disposes of the Plaintiff Company's property and confirmed it by a person who actually controls the company as a representative director of the Plaintiff Company, the disposal disposition shall be deemed to have been reverted to the company's income. In light of related evidence records and relevant regulations, the judgment below is justified.

2. Determination on the ground of appeal No. 2

According to relevant evidence and records, the court below's decision that determined that it was justifiable to determine the number of taxis illegally sold by the plaintiff company as 26 on the basis of the taxation data investigated in the tax disposition of this case, and that it was reasonable to calculate the total sales price of 26 on the basis of the average 21,00,000 won per unit based on the amount so confirmed as above in the case of the remaining 19 units, on the basis of the seven units for which the double sales price was specifically confirmed, and that there was no error of law by misunderstanding the facts contrary to the principle of base taxation, such as theory of lawsuit, and therefore there is no reason to support the argument.

3. Therefore, the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff who has lost. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Yoon-young (Presiding Justice)