beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's main claim is dismissed.
2. The Plaintiff:
A. Defendant B shall be KRW 8,509,472,366 and its 6,00,000 among them.
Reasons
1. Judgment as to the main claim
A. On August 4, 2009, the Defendants asserted that the Plaintiff concluded a contract to purchase the amount of KRW 10 billion with the amount of KRW 385,00 square meters from the Singu Singu Sindong-si E from the so-called Singu-si-si-si-si-si-si-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based
In addition, on November 12, 2008, the Plaintiff entered into a contract to purchase KRW 83,300,000,000, which is owned by Pakistan, with the intention of KRW 13.5 billion, but rescinded the above contract on November 4, 2009, and on November 4, 2009, the agreement was deemed to have been withdrawn from the company due to the Defendants’ embezzlement even for the purchase price of KRW 7 billion returned due to the rescission of the contract, and imposed corporate tax and income tax.
Accordingly, the Plaintiff filed a tax review on the imposition of each of the above corporate tax and income tax, and on July 2, 2014, the Tax Tribunal rendered a re-audit decision to the effect that “the actual owner of the 10 billion won excessively appropriated in the account book and the actual user of the 7 billion won won, re-audit and rectify the tax base and tax amount according to the result of re-audit.”
(On the other hand, the Plaintiff filed a complaint on the grounds that the Defendants embezzled KRW 10 billion in the real estate purchase price and KRW 7 billion in the total of KRW 17 billion in the real estate purchase price, but there was a decision of non-prosecution as to the portion of the above real estate purchase price and a decision of a witness suspension as to the portion of the share purchase price). The Defendants shall jointly and severally pay damages of KRW 17 billion in the amount of tort to the Plaintiff, as pointed out in the Korea-U.S. Tax Office.
B. Defendant B and C do not dispute the Plaintiff’s above assertion.
However, the subject of confessions, which is disadvantageous to the party to the principal facts, is limited to the facts.