Cho High Court Decision 2012Da4412 ( December 13, 2012)

After the report of simple expense rate, it is necessary to prove that the reported income amount and the actual expenses are equal to the estimated expenses when claiming the refund of the necessary expenses.

After the report of simple expense rate, it is necessary to establish that the revenue amount is recognized as it is, and that the actual amount is claimed separately from the estimated amount, and that the actual amount reported is reasonable, and that the actual amount is equivalent to the necessary expenses, and that the actual expenses paid are higher than the necessary expenses by estimation.

2013Revocation of disposition rejecting a request for rectification of global income tax

United StatesAA

Head of Eastern Tax Office

July 12, 2013

July 19, 2013

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

The defendant's refusal of correction of KRW 000 of the global income tax for the year 2008 against the plaintiff on May 16, 2012 (which seems to be a clerical error in May 15, 2012) is revoked.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The plaintiff is a rental business operator of Busan Jin-gu 000 ground buildings.

B. On May 7, 2012, the Plaintiff asserted that the cost of security service paid to the Defendant, a manager of the above building, and KimB, was omitted from necessary expenses, and that the Plaintiff filed a request for rectification of global income tax for the refund of KRW 000 of global income tax for the year 2008 and KRW 0000 of global income tax for the global income tax for the year 2009, and the Defendant rejected the Plaintiff’s request for rectification on May 15, 2012 (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

C. On October 8, 2012, the Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed a request for an inquiry with the Tax Tribunal on October 8, 2012, but was dismissed on December 13, 2012.

D. In the instant trial process, the Defendant added the grounds for disposition to the effect that, at the time of filing the global income tax return for the tax year 2008, the Plaintiff filed a return on the amount of income by applying simple expense rate based on the leased income amount, and even if the payment of the Plaintiff is recognized, the remaining expenses and the amount of income are not verified, the amount of income cannot be calculated only on the basis of the

[Reasons for Recognition] The whole purport of the arguments, 1, 2, 1, 2, 1, 7, 3, 4, and 5, 1, 1, 3, and 5

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The Plaintiff’s prior disposition is unlawful on the premise that the instant disposition was opposed to the payment of security service costs in cash to the literatureCCC and the SBB.

B. Determination

1) When a taxpayer returns a comprehensive income tax, he/she shall calculate the amount of income by deducting necessary expenses calculated by applying simple expense rates from the amount of income from the amount of income received under the return without filing a return in accordance with account books and documentary evidence; and, thereafter, the amount of income recognized by the tax authority according to his/her return should be recognized as it is, and it should be proved that the actual amount of income is available only for necessary expenses, and that the actual amount of income reported is reasonable, and that the actual amount of expenses actually paid exceeds necessary expenses by estimation.

2) According to the Plaintiff’s evidence No. 6 evidence No. 1, No. 00, the Plaintiff’s testimony at 200, and the Plaintiff’s comprehensive income tax for 208, the amount of 000 won calculated by deducting the amount of 000 won, which is the amount of 00 won under the account books and evidential documents, from the amount of 00, while the Plaintiff filed a final return on the tax base, and ProfessorBB received 00 won monthly from around September 2008 and worked as a manager of the building of this case, and the amount of 00 won which the Plaintiff paid to ProfessorB for 200, and the amount of 00,000 won which is the amount of 20,000 won which is the amount of 0,000 won which is the amount of 0,000 won which is the amount of 20,000 won which is the burden of proof, and 00,000 won which is the amount of 20,00.

3. Conclusion

Then, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.