Busan District Court 2013 Gohap46927

Disposition of imposition after the lapse of the exclusion period and five years of fraudulent act is highly probable.

(The same as the judgment of the first instance court) as existing practices, the tax imposed on the entertainment room has been paid, the exclusion period (five years) of the disposition has elapsed, and the disposition imposed five years after the fraudulent act is highly probable.

Article 30 of the National Tax Collection Act

Busan High Court 2014Na52605

Korea

MaximumD

Busan District Court 2013 Gohap46927

April 16, 2015

June 25, 2015

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The judgment of the first instance court shall be revoked. The contract for each gift entered in the separate sheet concluded between the defendant and the new AA shall be revoked. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff the amount calculated at the rate of 5% per annum from the day following the day this judgment becomes final and conclusive to the day of full payment.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasoning for this Court’s explanation is as follows: Gap’s evidence Nos. 20 and 21 is rejected; and the reasoning for this Court’s judgment (including the attached Form) is as stated in the first instance court’s judgment except for the following changes. Thus, it shall be cited in accordance with Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act

○ 제1심 판결 제4면 제5행의 "4. 본안에 대한 판단" ⇒ "3. 본안에 대한 판단"

○ 제1심 판결 제10면 제13 내지 16행 ⇒ 살피건대, 피고의 위 주장사실을 인정할 증거가 없다[위 양도소득세와 관련하여 신AA이 BB세무서장을 상대로 양도소득세부과처분취소의 소를 제기하였으나 1, 2심에서 패소하였고 현재 상고심(201X두19XX) 계속 중 이다].

○ 제1심 판결 제12면 제7행의 "돈을 지급할 동시" ⇒ "돈을 지급할 당시"

○ 제1심 판결 제13면 마지막 줄의 "5. 결론" ⇒ "4. 결론"

2. Conclusion

If so, the judgment of the court of first instance is legitimate, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit.