Seoul High Court 2011Nu45186 (Law No. 13, 2012)

Cho High Court Decision 2010Du3195 ( December 30, 2010)

(C) The extinctive prescription of the debt is interrupted due to the approval of the debt.

(Summary) The extinctive prescription of the dormant deposit obligation is interrupted due to the Plaintiff’s acceptance of the obligation, and as long as the Plaintiff actually continues to bear the above dormant deposit obligation, it is reasonable to deem that the extinctive prescription cannot be deemed to have been mature and finalized to the extent that it is considerably high to recognize it as profit when the extinctive prescription is completed

2012du15340 Revocation of the disposition of rejecting a request for rectification of corporate tax

XX Co., Ltd

The director of the tax office

Seoul High Court Decision 2011Nu45186 Decided June 13, 2012

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

While examining the grounds of appeal in comparison with the records of this case and the judgment of the court below, the ground of appeal on the grounds of appeal is not deemed to have been rejected or not.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Reference materials.

If the grounds for final appeal are not included in the grounds of appeal that make it appropriate for the court of final appeal to become a legal trial, such as matters concerning significant violation of Acts and subordinate statutes, etc., the system of final appeal will not continue to proceed with the deliberation on the merits of the grounds for final appeal, but will not proceed with the deliberation on the merits of the grounds for final