logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2013. 02. 15. 선고 2012두23181 판결
(심리불속행) 소득 귀속자로부터 법인세 상당액을 회수한 행위를 후발적 경정청구 사유로 볼 수 없음[국승]
Case Number of the immediately preceding lawsuit

Daegu High Court 2012Nu1069 ( February 21, 2012)

Case Number of the previous trial

Cho High-depth 201Gu0582 ( October 24, 2011)

Title

(Incompetence of hearing) An act of recovery of corporate tax amount from the person to whom the income belongs shall not be deemed as a ground for subsequent claim for correction.

Summary

(Summary) Even if the Plaintiff recovered the amount equivalent to the corporate tax from the person to whom the income belongs and changed the actual income amount to which the income earner belongs, it is difficult to regard the recovered act as "decision or rectification to change the ownership of the income income and other taxable objects to a third party", and even if it falls under the grounds for subsequent request for correction, it is inappropriate to request correction even more than 2 months from the date of notification of correction of the corporate tax or notification

Cases

2012du23181 Revocation of revocation of request for rectification

Plaintiff-Appellant

AAA Institute of Education for a school foundation

Defendant-Appellee

Head of the Tax Office

Judgment of the lower court

Daegu High Court Decision 2012Nu1069 Decided September 21, 2012

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

Reasons

All of the records of this case and the judgment of the court below and the grounds of appeal by appellant were examined, but their arguments on the grounds of appeal by appellant are not included in the grounds provided by each subparagraph of Article 4(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure for Appeal, and they are dismissed pursuant to Article 5 of the above Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by

Reference materials.

If the grounds for final appeal are not included in the grounds of appeal that make it appropriate for the court of final appeal to become a legal trial, such as matters concerning significant violation of Acts and subordinate statutes, etc., the system of final appeal will not continue to proceed with the deliberation on the merits of the grounds for final appeal, but will not proceed with the deliberation on the merits of the grounds for final

arrow