beta
Case Number of the immediately preceding lawsuit
Seoul Administrative Court 2010Guhap46777 ( October 23, 2011)
Case Number of the previous trial
Cho High Court Decision 2010Du2819 ( November 17, 2010)
Title
The act of failing to pay taxes on a passive basis does not constitute fraud or other unlawful act.
Summary
(The judgment of the court of first instance is the same as the judgment of the court of first instance) since the above act which did not pay the corresponding tax because it was passively omitted, does not constitute "a case of evading the national tax by fraud or other unlawful act", the exclusion period for imposition shall be five years.
Related statutes
Article 26-2 (Period for Excluding Assessment of National Taxes)
Cases
2011Nu24813 Revocation of Disposition of Imposition of Value-Added Tax, etc.
Plaintiff, Appellant
Maximum XX
Defendant, appellant and appellant
Head of Gangnam District Tax Office and one other
Judgment of the first instance court
Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2010Guhap46777 decided June 23, 2011
Conclusion of Pleadings
October 27, 2011
Imposition of Judgment
December 1, 2011
Text
1. All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.
Purport of claim and appeal
1. Purport of claim
The disposition of imposition of KRW 187,181,520 on February 1, 201 against the Plaintiff and KRW 93,827,870 on the first half-year value-added tax on February 1, 201, and KRW 11,382,140 on the first half-year value-added tax on 2002, and the first half-year value-added tax on 2002, and the global income tax on 34,772,540 on February 8, 2010 and global income tax on 11,382,140 on the second-year global income for 202.
2. Purport of appeal
The judgment of the first instance is revoked. The plaintiff's claim against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.
Reasons
1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;
The court's explanation of this case is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, it is citing this as it is in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Conclusion
Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is accepted in its entirety on the grounds of its reasoning, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just in its conclusion, and all appeals by the defendants are dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.