Seoul High Court 2013Nu29225 ( November 18, 2014)

(D) Since the processing price has been treated as a loan counter-loan, the bonus to the representative is reasonable.

(1) The representative's liability to the company was extinguished as the accounting of the processing sales and the processing sales is not dealt with, and the processing sales and the processing sales are not dealt with, and the accounting of the processing sales and the processing sales is treated as half of the principal short-term rental money. There is no substantial fact that the corporate tax was recovered and reported for revision pursuant to Article 106 (4) of the Enforcement Decree

Article 67 of the Corporate Tax Act

2014du15719 Disposition to revoke the imposition of value-added tax.

-Appellant

AA General Construction Corporation

1. BB regional tax office;

-Appellee

2. The director of theCC;

Seoul High Court Decision 2013Nu29225 Decided November 18, 2014

All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff and the Seoul Regional Tax Office. The costs of appeal between the Plaintiff and the Defendant Jinju Tax Office are assessed against each party.

All of the records of this case and the judgment of the court below and the grounds of appeal were examined, but it is clear that the appellant's grounds of appeal fall under Article 4 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure of Appeal and therefore, all of the appeals are dismissed pursuant to Article 5 of the above Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by