1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. Each disposition written by the Defendant against the Plaintiff on the attached Form 1.

The grounds why this Court shall explain in part of the acceptance of the judgment of the first instance.

1. Details of the disposition;

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion;

B. The relevant statutes are as follows: (a) the relevant part of the judgment of the court of first instance is identical to the corresponding part of the grounds for the judgment of the court of first instance (the two parallel parallel parallel parallel parallel parallel parallel parallel parallel parallel parallel parallel parallel parallel parallel parallel parallel parallel parallel parallel parallel parallel parallel with the attached parts, and the attached parts).

The Defendant’s key point of determination in this Court is that the payment for the retirement of the shares at issue in question is “income from shares” in the definition of dividends under the Convention between the Republic of Korea and Canada for the Avoidance of Double Taxation and the Prevention of Fiscal Evasion with respect to Taxes on Income (hereinafter “Korea-Canadian Tax Convention”). Since the said provision has the appearance of the retirement of profits in form and is deemed as cash dividends, it constitutes “distribution” under the Korea-Canadian Tax Convention.

In addition, Article 17 (1) 3 and Article 17 (2) 1 of the former Income Tax Act on constructive dividend, unlike the reduction of capital, cannot be applied to the retirement of profits using dividend as financial resources.

Therefore, the cost of retiring the stock at issue is only the dividend income under Article 17 (1) 1 or 7 of the former Income Tax Act, and it cannot be deemed as the constructive dividend under Article 17 (1) 3 of the former Income Tax Act.

Considering that the price for the retirement of shares in question is deemed as the constructive dividend under Article 17 (1) 3 of the former Income Tax Act, there is no change in the substance of the remaining shares, such as the capital before and after the retirement of shares, and the ratio of stockholding, in the case of the retirement of shares in this case, and therefore, the amount of the constructive dividend income should be deducted from the amount of the constructive dividend income, the “amount disbursed by the shareholder for the acquisition

Article 10(3) of the Canada Tax Convention, which has the law applicable to the determination of whether to be deemed a constructive dividend, is derived from the income or other rights that take part in profits other than income or bonds from the shares.