Seoul High Court-2016-Nu-45396 ( December 20, 2016)

(Procedure of Hearing) Whether the beneficial owner of the leased principal and interest income is AA.

(Main) The evidence submitted by AA alone is not sufficient to deem that AA has no income due to the reality that the possibility of loss of economic benefits from illegal income is realized, and furthermore, it is insufficient to recognize that AA has not been paid the principal, it is impossible to recover, or it was appropriated as necessary expenses due to the occurrence of bad debt. Thus, a disposition made by A is lawful.

Article 24 of the former Income Tax Act shall be calculated.

Supreme Court Decision 2017Du32944 Decided global income and revocation of disposition

AA

a) the Director of the Tax Office

Seoul High Court Decision 2016Nu45396 Decided December 20, 2016

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

Although the lower judgment was examined in light of the records of this case, it is recognized that the assertion on the grounds of appeal falls under Article 4 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Procedure

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 5 of the above Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.