(a) Where the corporate tax is assessed by estimation according to the standard rate of income; and

B. The burden of proving the legality of the estimated taxation

A. The estimated tax under Article 33(4) of the former Corporate Tax Act (amended by Act No. 3200, Dec. 28, 1979) is exceptionally acknowledged in cases where there are no taxpayer’s account books and documentary evidence, etc., on which the tax assessment and the determination of the amount of tax are based, or where it is impossible to impose tax by the taxation based on the basis of the taxation because the details are incomplete or false. Thus, it should be reasonable and reasonable to include the method and contents of the estimate in order to reflect the actual amount of income near the truth.

B. The burden of proving the reasonableness and validity of the estimated taxation is against the tax authority where the legitimacy of the estimated taxation is disputed.

A. Articles 33(4) and 93(1)1 and 93(2)1(b) of the former Corporate Tax Act (amended by Act No. 3200, Dec. 28, 1979); Articles 14 of the Administrative Litigation Act; Article 187 of the Civil Procedure Act

(b) Supreme Court Decision 81Nu244 delivered on February 8, 1983

Dongyang Cargo Co., Ltd. and one other

The director of the tax office

Seoul High Court Decision 80Gu748 delivered on December 13, 1982

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

The grounds of appeal by the defendant litigant are examined.

According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, since the plaintiffs are domestic corporations that conduct the above-mentioned business using transportation assistance by using the 1979-3 base rate for the total income of the plaintiff Dongyang Cargo Co., Ltd. with the amount of 20,81,200 won for the business year, and the corporate tax and defense tax calculated based on the 17,403,80 won for the plaintiff Dongyang Shipping Co., Ltd. with the amount of 17,00 won for the final return on the tax base of the corporate tax, respectively, were unable to submit the books and documentary evidence of the above final return on the tax base by the 30-year base rate for the tax base of the defendant's estimation based on the 197-year base rate for the tax base of the 197-year base rate, and the 3-year base rate for the tax base of the defendant's estimation based on the 197-year base rate for the tax base of the 1979-year base rate for the tax base return.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of the appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Lee Jong-soo (Presiding Justice)