Examination Income 2009-0138 ( November 27, 2009)

The propriety of the amount of withdrawal of deposits from a corporation to be treated as a bonus;

Since the certificate of deposit issued by a corporation was withdrawn and disposed of as a bonus that was released from the company, but the fact of return is confirmed, taxation disposition is unreasonable.

1. The Defendant’s disposition of imposition of global income tax of KRW 89,064,00 against the Plaintiff on April 22, 2009 shall be revoked.

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

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Defendant, on April 22, 2009, did not return to AAAAAAA (hereinafter referred to as “AAAAAA”) the Plaintiff’s corporate funds of KRW 250 million in the form of five certificates of deposit (the par value of KRW 50 million per page; hereinafter referred to as “the instant certificates of deposit”) in the Plaintiff’s name, and thus, deemed that the said KRW 250 million was out of the company and reverted to the Plaintiff. On April 22, 2009, the Defendant imposed KRW 89,064,000 on the Plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as “the instant disposition”).

B. The Plaintiff appealed and filed an objection on April 30, 2009, but was dismissed on July 10, 2009. The Plaintiff filed a request for examination on October 9, 2009, but was likewise dismissed on November 27, 2009.

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

2. Whether the disposition of this case is legitimate

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The plaintiff asserts that the disposition of this case is unlawful since 250 million won on the certificate of deposit of this case was returned to AA.

(b) Related statutes;

It is as shown in the attached Table related statutes.

(c) Fact of recognition;

1) On September 5, 2002, the Plaintiff, along with KimB, registered the wife lowestCC as the representative director and established the AAAA to conduct the business of manufacturing and selling gasoline additives, and thereafter actually operated the AAAA after establishing the AA.

2) AAA decided to establish a separate ELP Sales Co., Ltd. for the manufacture and sales of gasoline additives, and offered capital by inviting the general sales.

3) The Plaintiff kept the funds of the AAA in the form of cash, cashier’s checks, etc. as above, and stored KRW 200 million in sequence 1, 2, 3, 4 with negotiable certificates of deposit, 100 million with negotiable certificates of deposit, 5, 6, 100 million with negotiable certificates of deposit, 7, 100 won with negotiable certificates of deposit in Chapter 1. The details of negotiable certificates of deposit related to the instant case are as listed below.

5) 음@@이 2003. 1. 20. 최CC의 뒤를 이어 AAAAA의 대표이사로 취임하면서 AAAAA는 원고에게 원고가 보관하던 회사자금을 반환해달라고 요청하였고, 다음날 원고는 보관하고 있던 순번 ⑦, ⑧, ⑨ 3장의 양도성 예금증서 합계 4억 5,000만 원, 현금 1억 원 및 자기앞수표 2억 원 등 총 7억 5,000만 원을 AAAAA의 본부장 안AA에게 반환하였다.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 3 through 10.12, Eul evidence Nos. 1. 6 (including additional numbers), witness A’s testimony, and the purport of the whole pleadings

D. Determination

1) According to Article 67 of the Corporate Tax Act and Article 106(1)1 (b) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, where it is obvious that the amount included in the calculation of earnings has leaked out of the company, if it is an officer or employee to whom it belongs, it shall be treated as a bonus to the person to whom it belongs, and pursuant to Article 20(1)3 of the Income Tax Act, the amount treated as a bonus

2) Therefore, the plaintiff's failure to return KRW 250 million to AAA as to whether the above amount was out of the company, i.e., whether the above amount was out of the company, t. ①, ②, ③, ④ cash depositor with the t. h. h. h. h. h. h. h. h. h. h. h. k. k. k. k. k. h. h. h. h. h. h. h. k. h. h. h., 4 k's cash withdrawal date of the t. h. h. k. h. h. k. h. h. k. h. h. k. h. h. k. h. h. k. h. h. h. h. h. h. h. h. h. k. h. h. h. k. h. h. k. h. h. h. h. h. h. h. h.

Furthermore, in light of the fact that the Plaintiff’s return date of KRW 750 million to Ansan and the Plaintiff’s withdrawal date of KRW 100 million in cash on the negotiable certificates of deposit in all the two negotiable certificates of deposit dates on January 21, 2003, it is reasonable to deem that the Plaintiff’s withdrawal of KRW 100 million in cash on the two negotiable certificates of deposit constitutes KRW 100 million in cash out of the amount of KRW 750 million received from the Plaintiff, and thus, it cannot be deemed that the above 100 million out of the company. Therefore, the instant disposition that deemed that the Plaintiff was out of the company was unlawful.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is reasonable and acceptable, and it is so decided as per Disposition.