The legitimacy of the assertion that the bonus disposition of the omission in sales was used as internal personnel expenses;

Where a corporation has failed to record its sales in the account book, it shall be deemed that the total amount of the omitted sales including the corresponding expenses, such as the cost of sales, has been leaked out, barring special circumstances, even if the amount omitted sales and the corresponding expenses have been clarified.

The contents of the decision shall be the same as attached.

Articles 66 (Determination and Correction), 67 (Disposition of Income) of the Corporate Tax Act

Articles 20 and 127 of the Income Tax Act

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. Litigation costs shall be borne by the Plaintiff

1. Circumstances of dispositions;

(1) Sales (income amount) 145,354,546 won, ② Sales expenses and management expenses 218,657,556 won (including salary u300 91,417,993 won),

(3) -73,303,00 won [145,354,546 won (Sales)-218,654,556 won (sales expenses and u300 management expenses)];

(4) Non-business profits 6,827, and 5,00 won 642,813

(6) Ordinary profits -73,938,996 won [73,303,00 won (business profits) + 6,827 won (business profits - u300 - 642,813 won (business expenses)];

(7) Current net income - 73,938,96 won [73,938,996 won (ordinary profits) -0 won (corporate tax expenses)];

(8) Tax base-71, 795, 731 [-73, 938, 996 (net profit per books) +2,143,265 [300 won for income adjustment]

(9) 0 won calculated tax amount.

A. The Plaintiff was established on January 8, 2003 and operated a film production and digital content development business. On March 31, 2004, the Plaintiff reported the corporate tax base and its tax amount to the Defendant for the business year 2003 (from January 8, 2003 to December 31, 2003) as follows:

B. However, at the time of reporting the corporate tax base and the amount of tax for the business year 2003, the Plaintiff omitted the business subsidy of 146,991,000 won (hereinafter referred to as the “amount omitted in dispute sales”) received from the ○○ Bank Account (000-00-000, hereinafter referred to as the “instant account”) in the name of the Plaintiff in the sales, and did not enter the fact that the account book was paid the above KRW 146,91,000 in the sales amount.

C. Since July 31, 2004, the Plaintiff included 146,91,000 won in gross income as well as 80,002,00 won which was appropriated as intangible assets in the business year 2003 as deductible expenses, and filed a revised corporate tax for the business year 2003. However, on December 20, 2005, the Defendant recognized only the above 146,91,000 won as gross income and notified the Plaintiff of corporate tax 15,59,250 won in corporate tax for the business year 2003, and the Plaintiff did not pay the said amount to the Plaintiff by 30 years of bonus (amended by Act No. 7838, Dec. 31, 2005; hereinafter referred to as the “Act”), Article 67 of the former Corporate Tax Act, Article 106(1)1 of the Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act, and the Defendant did not pay the amount to the Plaintiff by 00,000.

Facts without dispute over the basis of recognition, Gap evidence 1, 2, Gap evidence 7-1, 2, and Gap evidence 8-1, 2-3, and 5-3, respectively, and the purport of the whole alteration

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The plaintiff's assertion

Although the Plaintiff omitted the omitted sales amount of KRW 146,91,00 in sales revenue when filing a report on the corporate tax base for the business year 2003, the above amount was managed through the account in accordance with the agreement with the Korea △○○○○○○○○. The disposition in this case was unlawful on the premise that the Plaintiff’s internal personnel expenses amount of KRW 42,324,00, external personnel expenses of KRW 43,889,500, and the amount transferred to another account under the Plaintiff’s name of KRW 91,285,50, and the credit card use settlement amount of KRW 567,428, and the settlement amount of KRW 5,238,432, and other expenses of KRW 1,98,420, and the above omitted sales amount of KRW 146,91,00 was discharged from the account, and the disposition in this case was in violation of the presumption that it was reverted to the ○○○.

(b) Related statutes;

It is as shown in the attached Table related statutes.

C. Determination

(1) On the other hand, if a corporation fails to enter its sales in its account book despite the fact of sales, the total amount of the omitted sales including the cost of sales and other response expenses shall be deemed to have been leaked to the company, barring any special circumstance. In this case, the special circumstance that the omission of sales and other response expenses are not leaked to the company from the company shall be proved by the company asserting the omission of sales and other response expenses (see Supreme Court Decision 2000Du3726, Jan. 11, 2002). In addition, as long as the revenue of the corporation leaked to the company without being entered in the account book is unclear, the tax authority shall have the duty to dispose of the revenue as it belongs to the representative's bonus, and in this case, the burden of proving that the revenue belongs to the company's bonus shall be proved to the taxpayer (see Supreme Court Decision 92Nu6747, Aug. 14, 192).

(2) With respect to the instant case, when the Plaintiff reported the tax base of corporate tax and its amount of tax for the business year 2003, the Plaintiff reported the sales amount of KRW 145,354,546 (income amount), KRW 218,657,556, including salary of KRW 91,417,993, and operating income of KRW 218,657,556, and KRW 146,91,000, which was the omission of sales amount at that time, was omitted from sales amount of KRW 146,91,000. Thus, to prove special circumstances, in light of the aforementioned legal principles, the Plaintiff should have reported the omission of sales amount of KRW 146,91,000 to KRW 146,50,000, and it is insufficient to prove that the Plaintiff had not spent expenses equivalent to the omission of sales amount of KRW 160,500,000, and it should be found that it had not been included in the sales amount of KRW 16506560.

(3) However, as seen earlier, the Plaintiff did not enter the amount of KRW 146,91,00 in its own account account despite having been remitted 146,91,00 to its own account account. ② Although the Plaintiff used 146,91,00 won of the omitted sales in its own account as claimed, the Plaintiff did not include the above KRW 146,91,00 in sales and management expenses including personnel expenses, but did not include the above KRW 218,657,56 in sales and management expenses. ③ Even if the Plaintiff’s assertion itself, the Plaintiff had not reported the tax base of corporate tax for the business year 2003, the Plaintiff did not enter the above KRW 146,991,285,50 in its own account, and the Plaintiff’s account transfer of KRW 146,97,50 in its own account to the above account account account, and the Plaintiff did not have any other evidence to acknowledge the amount of corporate tax for the business year from 200 to the account transfer of the above account.

(4) Therefore, the disposition of this case based on the premise that the ownership of the omitted sales amount of KRW 146,91,00 is unclear, and thus, the disposition of this case is legitimate, and the plaintiff's assertion that differs from this premise is not acceptable.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Related Acts and subordinate statutes

former Corporate Tax Act (amended by Act No. 7838 of Dec. 31, 2005)

○ Article 66 Correction and Correction

(1) Where any domestic corporation fails to report pursuant to Article 60, the head of the district tax office having jurisdiction over the place of tax payment or the Commissioner of the competent Regional Tax Office shall determine the tax base and tax

(2) Where a domestic corporation files a report under Article 60, the head of the district tax office having jurisdiction over the place of tax payment or the Commissioner of the competent Regional Tax Office shall correct the tax base and amount of corporate tax on the income

1. Where there are errors or omissions in the contents of the report;

Article 67 (Disposition of Income)

In filing a report on the tax base of corporate tax on income for each business year under the provisions of Article 60 or in revising Article 66, the amount included in the calculation of earnings shall be disposed of as prescribed by Presidential Decree, such as bonus, dividend, and other outflow from the company and internal reservation according to

Enforcement Decree of the former Corporate Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 19328 of Feb. 9, 2006)

§ 106. Disposal of income

(1) The amount included in the calculation of earnings under the provisions of Article 67 of the Act shall be disposed of pursuant to the provisions of the following subparagraphs. The same shall also apply to non-profit domestic corporations

1. Where the amount included in the calculation of earnings has clearly leaked out of the company, the dividends, bonuses from the disposition of profits, other income, and other outflow from the company under each of the following items according to the person to whom they accrue: Provided, That where the accrual is unclear, it shall be deemed as accrual to the representative (where the total number of stocks held by an officer who is not a minority shareholder under the provisions of Article 87 (2) and persons with a special relationship under the provisions of paragraph (4) of the same Article is 30% or more of the total number of stocks issued or total investment amount of the relevant corporation and the officer actually controls the operation of the corporation, he shall be deemed the representative, and where a corporation which has been exempted from withholding taxes under the provisions of Article 46 (12) of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act reports that there is a separate representative among the officers of the relevant corporation, the reported person shall be the representative, and where there

former Income Tax Act (amended by Act No. 7837 of Dec. 31, 2005)

○ Article 20 Employment Income

(1) Earned income shall be the following incomes generated in the corresponding year:

1. Class A:

(c) Amount treated as a bonus under the Corporate Tax Act;

Article 127 (Liability for Withholding)

(1) Any person who pays the following income or revenue amount to a resident or nonresident in the Republic of Korea shall withhold income tax on the resident or nonresident pursuant to the provisions of this Section:

4. Employment income amount of Class A;

Before December 31, 2005, Amended by Presidential Decree No. 19254, Dec. 31, 2005

Article 52 (Fictitious Payment Date of Dividend, Prize and Other Incomes Obtained by Disposal of Income)

(1) When the head of a tax office or the director of a regional tax office determines or revises the corporate income amount pursuant to the Corporate Tax Act, he/she shall notify the corporation concerned by a notice on change of income amount as prescribed by the Ordinance of the Ministry of Finance and Economy within 15 days from the date of the determination or correction of the corporate income amount: Provided, That where the location of the corporation concerned is not clear or it is impossible to serve the notice, or where the corporation concerned falls under Article 86 (1) 1, 2 and 4 of the National Tax Collection Act, he/she shall notify the relevant stockholder and the resident who is subject to the disposition of the relevant bonus

(2) In cases under paragraph (1), the dividend, bonus and other income shall be deemed paid or recovered on the date when the notice is received.