(a) Method of estimating the total amount of corporate tax or the income amount;

(b) Method of calculating gains on special taxation of corporate tax where the transfer value of the commercial buildings sold by a corporation is unclear.

(c) Whether the disposition of bonus for the omitted amount of sales by a corporation is legitimate, where special circumstances exist to deem that the omitted amount of sales by the corporation is not leaked out of the company;

(a) Determination of the amount of the corporate tax shall be made on the basis of the reasonable and reasonable basis, even if the amount is calculated by estimation, due to the reasons for the estimation of the total amount or income amount of the corporate tax;

(b) Where the transfer value of a corporation’s account books and other documentary evidence verifying the amount of sales revenue without filing a report on the amount of sales revenue in a commercial building is unclear, it shall be calculated by the standard market price pursuant to the provisions of the Corporate Tax Act in calculating the gains on the transfer of corporate tax special surtax. Therefore, the amount of sales revenue estimated for calculating the amount of corporate income shall not be calculated by using the transfer value as the transfer value.

(c) Where a corporation fails to keep the omitted amount of sales in an account book despite the fact of sales, unless there are special circumstances, the corporation shall be deemed to be an outflow from the account book, the payment place of which is unclear, and shall be disposed of as a bonus to the representative director and the income tax shall be imposed on the corporation as Class A employment income tax. However, if there are special circumstances to deem that the omitted amount of sales was not leaked out of the company,

(a) Article 32(3) of the Corporate Tax Act; Article 59-2(3) of the Corporate Tax Act; Article 32 of the Corporate Tax Act; Articles 93(1) and 93-2(2) of the Enforcement Decree of the Corporate Tax Act;

C. Supreme Court Decision 85Nu807 Decided April 14, 1987

1. The term "legal representative" means a person who has a right to know;

Head of Suwon Tax Office

Seoul High Court Decision 84Gu610 decided July 23, 1986

The judgment below is reversed and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

1. As to the first and third points:

According to the evidence of the judgment below, the members of the committee for the promotion of the establishment of the Seoseo-si, which became the promoters of the plaintiff corporation, purchased the above commercial site in the name of the plaintiff corporation before the incorporation of the plaintiff corporation and paid part of the purchase price of the above site with their investments, and established the plaintiff corporation as the capital. After the completion of the registration of establishment, the plaintiff corporation completed the registration of ownership transfer of the above building site and entered into a series of contracts related to the construction, and concluded the above commercial building site and buildings as security, and paid the balance of the purchase price of the above commercial site and the construction cost, etc. after selling the above building site and the sales price to the old Youngdong market removal merchants and other general merchants. Thus, it is evident that the plaintiff corporation acquired the above commercial site on its own account and constructed the commercial building, and then sold it to them, as argued by the plaintiff corporation, it is not possible for the plaintiff corporation to establish the committee for the promotion of the building building and the sales price of the commercial building for the purpose of accumulating the above commercial building to the plaintiff corporation's representative.

Therefore, as asserted in the decision that the instant tax disposition against the Plaintiff was lawful by deeming the Plaintiff as the actual subject of income attribution, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the rules of evidence or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the substance over form principle.

The assertion is groundless.

2. On the second and fourth grounds:

(1) According to the reasoning of the lower judgment, the lower court determined the tax base of the sales income of the Plaintiff 2 as follows: (a) the tax base of the sales income of the Plaintiff 3 was determined by deducting the total amount of KRW 1,347,922,50 from the total amount of KRW 97,97, and the total amount of KRW 200,00,00,000,000,000,000 for KRW 967,00,000,000,000,000 for KRW 96,00,000,000,000,000,00 KRW 96,000,000,000,000,000,000,00 KRW 96,00,000,000,000,000,000,00 KRW 96,036,00,000,00.

(2) However, even if there are reasons for estimation of the total amount of corporate tax or income, it is necessary to determine the above amount based on the reasonable and reasonable basis. Examining the detailed statement of the sales proceeds of the commercial building in question (Evidence 1-2) that the Defendant estimated the sales proceeds of the commercial building in this case, the Defendant’s 20th floor and the 3th floor of the sales proceeds of the commercial building in this case were 60,165,00 won per 22th floor and the 3th floor of the sales proceeds of the commercial building in this case (the 1st floor is 921,70,000,0000 won per 6th floor) and the 20th floor of the sales proceeds of the commercial building in this case and the 20th floor of the sales proceeds of the commercial building in this case are 90,000 won per 30,000 won per 20,500 won per 7th floor and the 205th floor of the sales proceeds.

(3) Meanwhile, according to Article 59-2 and Article 59-2 (3) of the Corporate Tax Act, gains from transfer, which form the tax base for special taxation of corporate tax, shall be the amount obtained by deducting the acquisition value, etc. as set forth in subparagraph 1, 2, and 3 of the same paragraph from the transfer value, and where the transfer value and acquisition value are unclear, the transfer value and acquisition value shall be the amount based on the standard market price at the time of transfer and the amount based on the standard market price at the time of acquisition, respectively. Thus, as in this case, in calculating gains from transfer of special taxation of corporate tax in cases where the transfer value is unclear because the Plaintiff did not report the above commercial sales revenue and keep account books and other evidential documents that can be confirmed without filing a report, as in this case, in calculating gains from transfer of special taxation of corporate tax, it shall be calculated based on the standard market price in accordance with the above provisions of the Corporate Tax Act, and it shall not be calculated by using the estimated sales revenue amount for calculating gains from transfer of special taxation of corporate tax.

(4) In addition, if a corporation fails to keep the sales revenue in the account book despite the fact of sales, the sales revenue omitted shall be deemed to be a bonus to the representative director and shall be disposed of as a bonus to the representative director, and if there are special circumstances to deem that the omitted amount of sales was not leaked from the account book, barring any other special circumstances, the income tax shall not be imposed as a bonus to the representative director. The records show that the Plaintiff corporation constructed the building and appropriated the sales revenue of the commercial building in the account book to the purchase balance of the site and the construction cost, etc., and even according to the final judgment of the court below, even if the sales revenue submitted by the evidence at the time of filing a corporate tax return for the business year from September 1, 1979 to August 19, 1980 was KRW 971,856,034, so the amount equivalent to the amount appropriated as the sales revenue of the commercial building in question shall not be deemed to have been leaked from the account of unclear outflow, such as at the time of original judgment.

(5) Nevertheless, the lower court’s determination that the instant taxation was lawful without considering the reasonableness of the estimation of sales revenue of the instant taxation, or the legality of the tax base of the Party A and the tax base of the Class A earned income, cannot be said to have affected the conclusion of the judgment by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the calculation of the tax base of the estimated corporate tax, the calculation of the tax base of the special taxation of the corporate tax, and the bonus disposal of the sales revenue by filing a report, or by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations. Ultimately, the allegation that the lower court pointed out these points

Therefore, the judgment of the court below shall be reversed and the case shall be remanded to the court below. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all Justices.

Justices Kim Jong-chul (Presiding Justice)