The judgment below

Among them, the part concerning principal tax is reversed, and this part of the case is remanded to Busan High Court.

(q) the remainder;

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Regarding ground of appeal No. 2

A. Whether a sale of stocks constitutes a transfer of stocks which are assets transaction, or a retirement of stocks which are capital transaction or a refund of capital is determined based on the substance of the transaction and the intent of the parties. However, under the substance over form principle, not simply depends on the content or form of the contract, the entire process of the transaction, such as the party’s intent and the process of concluding the contract, the method of determining the price, and the progress of the transaction, should be

(See Supreme Court Decision 2012Du27091 Decided May 9, 2013, etc.). B.

The court below determined that it is reasonable to deem that the Plaintiff acquired the shares of this case from the beginning to refund the shares by taking account of the following: (a) the minutes of the general meeting of shareholders authenticated on April 16, 2007, stating that “the purchase of the shares of this case is approved; and (b) the minutes of the general meeting of shareholders authenticated on July 10, 2007, which were notarized on April 16, 2007, are not contrary to the contents of the notarized general meeting minutes of shareholders authenticated on April 16, 2007; and (c) the Plaintiff and its major shareholder need to acquire the shares of this case, which amount to 11.35% of the total shares issued in order to secure a stable management right, and thus it is difficult to deem that the Plaintiff acquired the shares of this case from the beginning to a third party with the intention to sell them.

C. Examining the above legal principles and records, we affirm this fact-finding and judgment of the court below, and contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the court below violated logical and empirical rules.