beta
Case Number of the immediately preceding lawsuit
Daejeon High Court (Cheongju)-2015-Nu 11449 ( October 18, 2011),
Title
(A) The entry amount of the borrowed account shall be presumed to be an omission in sales.
Summary
(Abstract of the original trial) No evidence of the certificate of omission in sales may be easily denied only when the investigation is conducted, and the claimant shall prove that the amount of the borrowed account is not the amount of omission in sales.
Related statutes
Article 67 of the Corporate Tax Act
Cases
2017Du37277 Revocation of Disposition of Imposing corporate tax, etc.
Plaintiff-Appellant
OO
Defendant-Appellee
O Head of tax office
Judgment of the lower court
Daejeon High Court (Cheongju)-2015-Nu 11449 ( October 18, 2017),
Text
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.
Reasons
All of the records of this case and the judgment of the court below and the grounds of appeal were examined, but it is clear that the assertion on the grounds of appeal by the appellant constitutes Article 4 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure for Appeal and therefore, the appeal is dismissed under Article 5 of the above Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by