logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.08.31 2015구합71540
종합소득세부과처분취소
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. From August 30, 2007, the Plaintiff is a person who had worked as the IMF Egine and Construe Company, a corporation, as Kuwa, as B (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”).

B. Notwithstanding the Plaintiff’s “resident” under the former Income Tax Act (amended by Act No. 12852, Dec. 23, 2014; hereinafter the same), the Defendant determined that the Plaintiff omitted the return of global income tax on KRW 885,211,251 received from the Nonparty Company in the year 2011; and on June 10, 2015, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of KRW 403,172,250, global income tax for the year 201.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”). C.

The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an appeal on July 10, 2015, but the Tax Tribunal dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim on September 22, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1, 2, Gap evidence 2, 3, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion constitutes “a person with an occupation that requires him/her to reside abroad for at least one year,” and thus, the Plaintiff should be deemed to have no address in Korea pursuant to Article 2(4)1 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 26067, Feb. 3, 2015; hereinafter the same). The instant disposition based on the premise that the Plaintiff falls under a “resident” under the former Income Tax Act is unlawful.

(b) Entry in the attached Form of relevant statutes;

C. Fact-finding 1) The Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s spouse maintained their resident registration since they moved into the Plaintiff’s head of Sungnam-si, Sungnam-si, Sungnam-si, 108 Dong 105 on January 7, 2008, and the Plaintiff’s spouse continued to live in the above domicile, and the Plaintiff’s spouse resided in the above domicile when he stays in Korea. The Plaintiff’s spouse’s child 1 child 2007 7465 365 365 208 2008 365 365 365 365 365 365 2009 201 365 365343208 365 365 2010 36536573573463532) from 2007 to 2011.

arrow