logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2016.01.22 2014구합17111
종합소득세납부결정고지취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On June 1, 2006, B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant company”) started its business for the purpose of real estate consulting business, etc. on the old-si, the Plaintiff was appointed as a director of the instant company on May 15, 2007, and held 40% of the shares of the instant company from 2007 to 2007.

B. On the balance sheet attached to the report on the tax base and amount of corporate tax for the business year 2008 of the instant company, a short-term loan of KRW 395,820,821 (hereinafter “instant loan”) for shareholders, executives, and affiliated companies is included. The statement on the recognition of provisional payment, etc. is included in the statement on the determination of the interest rate for provisional payment.

C. The instant company closed ex officio as of June 30, 2010, and did not report and pay corporate tax and value-added tax since 2009, and was dissolved pursuant to Article 520-2(1) of the Commercial Act on December 2, 2013.

On September 3, 2012, the head of the Gu-U.S. Tax Office, who was audited by the director of the Central District Tax Office, notified the Defendant of taxation data that the instant company would dispose of the amount of KRW 395,820,821 (hereinafter “the instant loan”) as dividends to the Plaintiff during the business year to which the date of closedown belongs, on the ground that the instant company failed to collect the amount of KRW 395,820,821 (hereinafter “the instant loan”). Accordingly, on January 3, 2014, the Defendant decided and notified the Plaintiff of KRW 141,730,760 (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

E. The Plaintiff appealed and filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal on April 8, 2014. However, the Tax Tribunal dismissed the Plaintiff’s appeal on June 30, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 3 evidence, Eul evidence 1 to 6 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff repaid the total amount of KRW 142,886,00 to four other companies including D, and was the general management expenses of the instant company from 2007 to 2009.

arrow