beta
Text
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.
Reasons
1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited the same reasoning as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the dismissal or addition of the following contents among the grounds of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it is recognized in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420
2. On December 31, 2014, “FE 31, 2014” in the 2nd 6th 6th eth 7th eth 1st eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth e
2. On May 12, 2017, the Plaintiff, on May 12, 2017, deemed “The Income Tax Act (amended by Act No. 13282, May 13, 2015)” to be “The Plaintiff on May 4, 2017.”
2. The "entry" in the 14th page shall be changed to "each entry".
4. Each description of "Nos. B 4 through 6, 8, 9, 13" shall be deemed "Nos. 2, 8, 12, B1, 4, 9, 14 (including each number)."
The 4th parallels to 13th parallels are as follows:
[1] The Plaintiff imported fishery products of KRW 280,00,000 through eight times in the name of the instant business establishment regardless of F in the second half of 2014, and distributed them in Korea (the Plaintiff also recognized them through a preparatory document dated March 19, 2019).
(2) At the time of the instant tax investigation, the Plaintiff stated to the effect that, during the second period of 2014, an investigating official was the actual representative of the instant workplace during the instant taxable period, and dealt with all business operations, accounting management, etc., and that he was involved in the process of the instant business as the representative of the instant workplace during the second period of 2014 (the Plaintiff’s answer (No. (No. 4) cannot be admitted as evidence because it was written in the manner of the investigating official’s convenience, compilation, etc.), but the Plaintiff’s allegation is without merit, since there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.
[. See 4, 19 pages 19 of "........................"