logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2013. 05. 09. 선고 2013두1836 판결
(심리불속행) 특허권 대여 행위의 영리성, 반복성 등을 볼 때 사업소득으로 과세한 당초 처분은 적법함[국승]
Case Number of the immediately preceding lawsuit

Seoul High Court 2012Nu19726 ( December 07, 2012)

Case Number of the previous trial

early 201J 0289 ( October 30, 2011)

Title

(C) The initial disposition that was imposed as business income is legitimate in light of the nature of profit-making, repetition, etc. of patent lending.

Summary

In light of social norms, the initial disposition imposed as business income in light of various circumstances, such as the commercial nature of patent lending, the existence of continuous and repeatedness, the length of the transaction period, and the amount provided.

Cases

2013du1836 global income and revocation of disposition

Plaintiff-Appellant

UnionA

Defendant-Appellee

Head of Sungnam Tax Office

Judgment of the lower court

Seoul High Court Decision 2012Nu19726 Decided December 7, 2012

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

Reasons

All of the records of this case, the judgment of the court below, and the grounds of appeal by appellant are examined, and it is clear that the grounds of appeal fall under Article 4 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure for Appeal, and the appeal is dismissed under Article 5 of the same 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