1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the following matters among the grounds of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, it shall be cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of

2. The 7th page "the corporation of this case" shall be deemed to be "the corporation of this case".

2. Myeonn 8 2009

4. 23. The term "23. 23. 23. 23. 4. 4. The term "Witness C" in the 13th 13th 4. 5. 5. 5. 12 through 15 are as follows. Even if a person is registered as a representative director on the corporate register of a company, if he did not actually operate the company, he/she may not transfer the company's unknown income to him/her and impose a comprehensive income tax on him/her. Meanwhile, since a person who is registered as the representative director on the corporate register can be presumed to have actually operated the company, the representative director on the corporate register shall prove that he/she failed to actually operate the company.

(1) In light of the aforementioned legal principles and the following facts and circumstances, it is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff, who was registered as the representative director of the instant company on the corporate register, actually failed to operate the instant company on the ground that the Plaintiff was a de facto representative director of the instant company on the corporate register alone, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise, and rather, it is reasonable to deem that the Plaintiff was a de facto representative operator of the instant company, in light of the aforementioned legal principles and the aforementioned legal principles and the purport of the entire argument as seen earlier, or in light of the following facts and circumstances, the Plaintiff was deemed to have been a de facto representative of the instant company.

“”

2. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.