Daejeon High Court-2016-Nu-11566 ( October 13, 2016)

(A) Whether the difference in the amount of the diagnosis is legitimate as a bonus disposition by deeming the difference in the amount of the diagnosis as a temporary payment from office; and

(in the original instance) The difference in the overcharged amount paid to a worker who is not a real retired person shall be equivalent to the provisional payment in the office of work.

Article 44 of the Enforcement Decree of Corporate Tax Act

2016Du55797. Cancellation of notice of change in income amount

○○○○ Hospital

Daejeon director of the tax office

Daejeon High Court-2016-Nu-11566 ( October 13, 2016)

2017.02.03

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

The records of both the Reasons for Appeal and the Reasons for Appeal were examined, but the Reasons for Appeal by the appellant

The argument regarding the procedure of appeal does not include the reasons prescribed in the subparagraphs of Article 4(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Procedure of Appeal.

The appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 5 of the same Act, since it is found that there is no reason or reason to do so;

It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.