The legitimacy of finding facts related to the recognition and dismissal of the final and conclusive judgment in the tax litigation

The fact of recognition of a final and conclusive criminal judgment in a tax litigation shall not be the sufficiently evidence and shall not be rejected in the absence of special circumstances.

Article 187 of the Civil Procedure Act

Supreme Court Decision 62Da207 Delivered on August 30, 1962

Plaintiff

Litigation performers of the Gwangju District Office

Gwangju High Court Decision 75Gu24 delivered on October 7, 1976

The original judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Gwangju High Court.

The plaintiff's grounds of appeal are examined.

According to the records, the facts of this case's tax evasion are the proviso to the non-party sexual traffic tax evasion report by which the plaintiff was the manager of the theater operated by the plaintiff and the plaintiff was prosecuted for the plaintiff. This case's tax evasion is the amount of the tax evasion tax recognized as the facts charged. The criminal judgment of the court of first instance (Evidence A 21) can be seen as a fact that the sum of the amount of the evaded tax is less than the facts charged and less than 18,445,682 won. Thus, even if it is not detained by the facts found in the criminal trial in the original civil case or tax litigation, the fact that the final and conclusive criminal judgment is recognized as a serious evidence (see Supreme Court Decision 62Da207, Aug. 30, 62. 30). The court below rejected this case's tax evasion even if the final and conclusive judgment of the court of first instance did not have any special circumstance, or cannot avoid criticism in violation of the empirical rules.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below cannot be reversed on the grounds of its reasoning, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Lee Il-young (Presiding Justice)