beta
Case Number of the immediately preceding lawsuit
Seoul Administrative Court 2012Guhap28001 (Law No. 29, 2014)
Title
It is sufficient to recognize that the sales recorded in the crime sight list are the actual sales of the plaintiff.
Summary
In view of the fact that the authenticity of a criminal case is recognized and that the plaintiff omitted sales on the basis of various data, including the list of crimes, in which the reasonableness of the contents of the judgment is confirmed, it is sufficient to recognize the sales recorded in the list of crimes as the actual sales of the plaintiff.
Judgment
Contents are as attached (the same as the first instance court).
Related statutes
Article 66 of the Corporate Tax Act: Decision and Correction
Cases
2014-Nu-5349 Tax disposition, etc. revoked
Plaintiff and appellant
AAA, Inc.
Defendant, Appellant
The director of the tax office.
Judgment of the first instance court
Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2012Guhap28001 Decided May 29, 2014
Conclusion of Pleadings
February 25, 2015
Imposition of Judgment
March 25, 2015
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The judgment of the first instance is revoked. The defendant's imposition of the corporate tax for the business year 2007 against the plaintiff on June 1, 2010 and the imposition of the corporate tax for the business year 2007 against the plaintiff on May 27, 2010, and on May 27, 2010, considered the person to whom the income accrued to the plaintiff on May 27, 2010 as redB and revoked all the notice of changes in the amount of income disposed of as a bonus of the income accrued in 2005, OOOO(2006, OOOOO(207), OOOO(207, and OOO(207).
Reasons
This Court's reasoning is as follows, except for the addition of "Evidence 10, 15 of Act No. 14 of the 8th judgment of the court of first instance" to "Evidence 18, 24 of Act No. 14 of the 14th judgment of the court of first instance", and therefore, this Court's reasoning is identical to the part of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, this Court's reasoning is cited in accordance with Article 8 (2)
Therefore, the judgment of the first instance court is legitimate, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.