Whether the headquarters is subject to reduction or exemption to local areas

Inasmuch as the number of employees after relocation is unclear whether they are full-time workers, it does not constitute personnel expenses eligible for reduction or exemption.

Article 63-2 of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act

2015Guhap10128 Disposition of revocation of imposition of corporate tax, etc.

AAA, Inc.

Head of the Busan District Tax Office

July 20, 2016

October 5, 2016

1. The Defendant’s imposition disposition of KRW 1,038,095,85 of corporate tax for the business year 2007 against the Plaintiff on March 28, 2013 in excess of KRW 768,064,38 of the imposition disposition shall be revoked.

2. The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.

3. 3/4 of the costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff, and the remainder by the Defendant, respectively.

Cheong-gu Office

The Defendant’s disposition of imposition of KRW 1,038,095,855 for the business year 2007 against the Plaintiff on March 28, 2013 is revoked.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is a company established on November 1, 2004, and has its head office in 85-9, Gangnam-gu, Gangnam-gu, Seoul.

On November 5, 2007, the head office has been relocated to the Sejong-ri 293-5 Dong-gu, Asan-si (hereinafter referred to as the "the relocation of the head office as mentioned above") while engaging in the sales business, trade business, advertising agency business, etc.

B. After such relocation, the Plaintiff is an employee of bbb, cc, dd, e after such relocation.

New employment was made by the Plaintiff for the business year 2007 corporate tax by applying the provisions of temporary special tax reduction and exemption under Article 63-2 of the former Restriction of Special Taxation Act (amended by Act No. 8827 of Dec. 31, 2007; hereinafter referred to as the "former Restriction of Special Taxation Act") to the corporate tax for the business year 2007, the ratio of 51.1%, which is the ratio of the total amount of salaries received after the relocation to the total annual salary that the total amount of salaries received after the relocation to the relocated relocated head of the relocated head of the relocated head office in the business year 2007, and accordingly, the Defendant reported to the Defendant that 9.31% of the total corporate tax for the business year 1,843,046,768 won of the omitted non-taxation wage was reduced to 941,871,124 won.

C. On March 2013, the director of the Central Regional Tax Office may conduct a tax investigation with respect to the Plaintiff’s employees.

BB and Cc have been engaged in the manufacturing industry that the Plaintiff had newly operated after the relocation of its head office, and ee, dd, f, gg have not been working at the relocated head office, and the said employees.

at the relocated head office, and the Plaintiff’s exemption and reduction rate of corporate tax for the 2007 business year shall be determined.

The Defendant notified the Defendant of the taxation data to the effect that it would be.

D. Accordingly, the Defendant’s exemption and reduction of the Plaintiff’s corporate tax as indicated below on March 28, 2013.

B The corporation tax for the business year of 2007, with the disposal of property as stated in the table 2 below, to the plaintiff

1,038,095,855 won (including additional tax) was corrected and notified (hereinafter referred to as "disposition of this case").

Table 1

The total annual salary (the total annual salary) of the retirement day of his/her member who is a member of his/her family shall be paid to him/her.

Gg on January 1, 2005 50,634,820 22,500,000

Fffs at the relocated head office on September 85, 2006,162,618

III. 9 July 11, 2007. 675,861 6,574,577

Gg 1 January 1, 2005 34,548,000 work at the relocated head office

Xx - March 31, 2007 5,233,568- - March 31, 2006

xx on January 1, 2005 - 8,055,330 on March 31, 2007

xx on November 1, 2003 12,460,727 - On May 31, 2007

xx on November 1, 2004 - 17,578,640 on May 31, 2007

Joints 25,349,564 29,074,577

*The percentage of reduction: 50% of the number of employees at the relocated head office (=2/4) and the percentage of wages at the relocated head office

12.90% (i.e., 29,074,577/225,349,564) the lesser of 12.90%

Table 2

(unit: Won)

Tax amount calculated by deducting the already paid tax amount from the calculated tax amount;

1,843,046,768 237,789,69 368,822,667 1,974,079,736 935,983,81 1,038,095,8555

D. On June 26, 2013, the Plaintiff raised an objection against the Director of Daejeon Regional Tax Office against the Plaintiff.

The above objection was dismissed on July 25, 2013, and the appeal was filed with the Director of the Tax Tribunal on October 25, 2013.

However, the above appeal was dismissed on October 17, 2014.

[Ground of Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 4, 6, Eul evidence 1, the whole pleadings

purport of this chapter

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

1) Of the Plaintiff’s employees, thefff and g is an employee who had worked prior to the relocation of the headquarters.

Before the relocation of the headquarters, the re-Decree performed the business of planning advertising-related affairs, the management of the advertising media company, etc., and the management of the customer and the advertising media company, and the g is domestically and overseas.

The voting rights management and registration, customer advertising-related affairs, various plannings, and general affairs have been conducted;

After the transfer of the company, the advertisement business was also conducted for the exploitation of new advertising customers.

Gg does not work regularly in the office due to the above characteristics of the work, and the plaintiff does not work in the office.

work at the previous agency, however, that fff, gg was not at the relocated agency.

In this case, the disposition of this case calculated the exemption rate of corporate tax by exclusion from the relocated employees

of this chapter.

2) Of the Plaintiff’s employees, e and d are newly employed by the Plaintiff while moving its head office.

e as an employee, e has performed overseas distribution business by examining study experience in foreign countries, and d spe has spe

Since cc and D are engaged in the affairs of the domestic wholesale, retail, and service sector by examining the experience of working at any place, c and D are the number of persons working at the relocated head office. Nevertheless, the above employees are transferred.

corporation tax reduction or exemption by excluding from the relocated employees on the ground that they were not on duty at the company

The instant disposition that was assessed is unlawful.

3) Of the Plaintiff’s employees, bb and c newly employed by the Plaintiff while moving its head office.

bb as an employee, bb is a general director of the plaintiff and established at the local level at the relocated head office

c, the bbb's refusal, of the cb's execution of the overall work, shall be

The work is required by the Department of Work and Management Support. Nevertheless, this is required by the Department of Work and Management Support.

For use, ccc to carry on the manufacturing industry or the manufacturing industry, and the manufacturing industry:

The plaintiff relocated its head office to the relocated head office on the grounds that the business is newly operated after the plaintiff moved its head office.

The disposition of this case, which calculated the exemption rate of corporate tax by exclusion from unmanned sources, is unlawful.

B. Relevant statutes

It is as shown in the attached Form.

C. Determination

1) Relevant legal principles

According to Article 63-2 (1) 2, (2) 2, and (3) of the former Restriction of Special Taxation Act, a corporation

As prescribed by the Presidential Decree, where a business commences after relocating its head office to December 31, 2008 under the conditions as prescribed by the Presidential Decree, the term "amount obtained by subtracting the transfer margin of the rights to acquire land, buildings and real estate from the tax base of the relevant taxable year" means the ratio of "total annual salary received by the employees working at the relocated head office after the relocation of the relevant taxable year to the total annual salary received by the entire employees of the relevant corporation", and "ratio of the employees working at the relocated head office within the Seoul Metropolitan area to the total number of employees working at the head office and at the relocated head office within the Seoul Metropolitan area", with respect to the income equivalent to the amount calculated by multiplying the smaller ratio among the total annual salary received by the employees at the relocated head office within the Seoul Metropolitan area and at the relocated head office within four years from the beginning date of the following taxable year, the total corporate tax shall be reduced for the taxable year to which the date of relocation belongs, and at the end within two years thereafter, the term "total average number of employees working at the relocated head office" means the average number of full employees working at the relocated head office within the Seoul Metropolitan area.

The burden of proof on the requirements of corporate tax reduction under the above provisions shall be deemed to have been asserted.

It shall be deemed that a tax obligor is a tax obligor (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 94Nu12708, Apr. 26, 1996; 68Nu161, Oct. 8, 1968); on the other hand, whether the number of regular employees engaged in the business at the headquarters relocated to an area other than the Seoul Metropolitan area constitutes “regular employees engaged in the business at the headquarters located outside the Seoul Metropolitan area” should be determined by comprehensively taking into account all the circumstances, such as the relevant employees’ place of work, form of work, details of business, and the relationship of the order of the duties (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Du7830, Oct

In addition, taxation requirements or tax exemption requirements under the principle of no taxation without law.

The interpretation of tax laws and regulations is interpreted in accordance with the law, unless there are special circumstances.

No expansional interpretation or analogical interpretation without reasonable grounds shall be permitted, in particular, requirements for reduction or exemption.

It is strictly interpreted that it can be seen as a expressly preferential provision among the regulations.

It also accords with the principle of fairness (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2002Du9537, Jan. 24, 2003; 2008Du7830, Oct. 23, 2008).

2) Whether fffs and gs are the employees at the relocated head office

set forth in sub-paragraph 2, Eul evidence 3-1, 2, Eul evidence 4-1, and 2

1. The following circumstances, i.e., the Plaintiff’s headquarters at the time of its relocation:

The address of Gangnam-gu was Seoul Seo-dong, Gangnam-gu, Seoul on December 24, 2007, the address of Gangnam-gu, Seoul on April 22, 2008, the address of Gangnam-gu, Seoul on which the plaintiff's head office moved to the Dong-dong, Gangnam-gu, Seoul on April 22, 2008, the address of cC at the time when the plaintiff's head office was relocated was Guro-gu, Seoul on January 28, 2008, the Dong-gu, Youngcheon-dong, Yongsan-gu, Seoul on March 11, 2008, the address was relocated to 2, Yongsan-gu, Seoul on March 11, 2008. The plaintiff's head office was moved from the Dong-dong, Seoul on November 5, 2007 to Asan-si, the head office appears to have been continuously residing in Seoul, ② the head office working at the relocated head office was not fffff, gb, or c. working at the relocated.

The sole fact that fff and g cannot be deemed to have worked regularly at the relocated head office; 4.

fffs and ggs any specific work performed at the relocated head office;

In light of the fact that there is no material, Gap evidence No. 10 alone fff, ggggga

It is insufficient to recognize that he had worked at the relocated head office from November 5, 2007 to December 31, 2007, and there is no other evidence to recognize otherwise. Therefore, fff and gg are not the employees at the relocated head office under Article 63-2(2) and (3) of the former Restriction of Special Taxation Act, and this part of the Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit.

3) Whether e and d are the employees working at the relocated head office

set forth in sub-paragraph 2, Eul evidence 3-1, 2, Eul evidence 4-3, and 4

e in the following circumstances, i.e., at the time the Plaintiff’s headquarters is relocated:

The address of Gangnam-gu, Seoul, the address of which was changed from May 8, 2008 to the Sacheon-si, the address of DD was continued from October 28, 2005, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, and eee and Dd were employed by the Plaintiff company on November 5, 2007;

bbb worked at the relocated head office has no e, d'e, and d', e, and d'.

(3) The person working at the relocated head office means that there is no limit set at the relocated head office.

referring to the full-time employees engaged in the head office at the relocated headquarters outside the Seoul Metropolitan area.

F. Home e performed the plaintiff's overseas distribution business, and DD's domestic Do and corporation

, even if the service sector has performed its duties, at the head office of the Plaintiff relocated to ASEAN.

Any person who can find out the fact that he cannot be deemed to have worked regularly at the relocated head, and ④ what is the specific work performed by ccc and ddd in the relocated head.

In light of the fact that there is no charge, e, d 207 only with the statement of Gap evidence 10.

11. It is insufficient to recognize that he had worked at the relocated head office from May 2 to December 31, 2007, and otherwise;

§ 63 of the former Restriction of Special Taxation Act, e, or d shall, therefore, be subject to

2. The part of the plaintiff is not the employee at the relocated head office under paragraphs 2 and 3.

The argument is without merit.

4) Whether bb and c are the employees at the relocated head office

The ratio of reduction and exemption of corporate tax on corporations of relocated head office outside the Seoul Metropolitan area

corporation has been engaged in the same type of business as the corporation has operated before the relocation of its head office.

Only the source of origin is included in ‘the number of persons engaged in the relocation', and ① the foregoing special case of taxation

Examining the language and text of the relevant statutes, such as Article 63-2(2)2 and (3) of the Restriction Act, and the Enforcement Decree of the same Act.

Only the employees engaged in the same type of business as that operated prior to the relocation of the headquarters of the Do;

No grounds can be found to regard it as an unmanned source, and ② The Restriction of Special Taxation Act

Article 63-2 (2) 2 of the Act on December 29, 2000 provides that where the headquarters is relocated, corporate tax shall be reduced or exempted on the amount of income equivalent to the amount calculated by multiplying the annual salary for the number of employees of the headquarters relocated to an area outside the Seoul Metropolitan life zone by the ratio of the total annual salary for the total number of employees of the corporation, which is equivalent to the amount calculated by multiplying the income accrued from the relevant business by the ratio of the total annual salary for the total number of employees of the corporation.

A. On December 29, 2000, the part of the "income from the business in question" was deleted. In full view of the fact that the income from the business newly commenced after the relocation of the headquarters seems to fall under the tax base for corporate tax reduction and exemption, ③ the purpose of Article 63-2 of the former Restriction of Special Taxation Act, etc. is to encourage the relocation of the corporation to an area outside the Seoul Metropolitan area and to promote employment creation and economic revitalization in the area outside the Seoul Metropolitan area, and it is difficult to see that the relocation of the headquarters to an area outside the Seoul Metropolitan area does not go against the above purpose of Article 63-2 (2) 2 (b) of the former Restriction of Special Taxation Act to expand the business and receive additional income after the relocation of the headquarters, it cannot be deemed that it is limited to the employee engaged in the business in which the relocation of the headquarters was conducted before the relocation of the headquarters, and the number of employees engaged in the business newly commenced after

As to this case, health care units No. 8-1, 2, 9, 11, 3-1, 2

bb and c from November 5, 2007 to show the overall purport of the pleading.

The plaintiff's relocated head office may prepare for the operation of the automobile parts manufacturing business and the above manufacturing business.

In fact, the plaintiff is a facility for carrying on the business of manufacturing motor vehicle parts, such as a factory, from BB.

The acquisition by transfer of the vehicle parts manufacturing business began, and the occurrence of sales from March 2008 occurred.

bb and cc may establish the fact that the plaintiff had its head office at the relocated head office of the plaintiff.

the former Restriction of Special Taxation Act as an employee engaged in the business of manufacturing motor vehicle parts newly commenced;

Article 63-2 (2) and (3) shall be included at the relocated head office's employees.

As to this, the Defendant, from November 5, 2007 to December 31, 2007, 40,100,000 won (i.e.bb 26,80,000 + ccc 13,300,000) paid by the Plaintiff to bb and bb from November 5, 2007 to December 31, 2007, is a factory.

It can not be seen as the consideration for the provision of labor only, and it can not be seen as the consideration for the provision of labor.

Party A’s certificate No. 9, 11, 12, 13, and No. 3-1;

2 The following circumstances, in which each entry is deemed to show the overall purport of the pleadings, i.e., (b) cc and motor vehicle parts manufacturing business, which are known as being employed by the Plaintiff before entering the Plaintiff;

After transferring manufacturing facilities for automobile parts, such as factories, to the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff was employed as the employee.

Even after the expiration of the term ‘the creation of the parts of the motor vehicle has continued'; 2.

The Plaintiff’s salary of KRW 40,100,000 from November 5, 2007 to December 31, 2007 to bb and cc

In addition to those paid, for acquisition by transfer of manufacturing facilities for motor vehicle parts, such as factories, to bb

Article 10 and Article 11 (1) of the Plaintiff’s wage provision provides that the employee who has served for not less than one month as of the bonus payment date shall be paid in full as of December 26 of each month. In full view of the fact that the Plaintiff’s payment of bonuses to BB and C on December 2007 cannot be deemed to have been made for the purpose of tax evasion, bb and Cc were to have paid in full as the employee of the Plaintiff from November 5, 2007 to December 31, 207, it appears that the Plaintiff was paid in total 40,100,000 won from the Plaintiff by carrying out the business of manufacturing the automobile parts, and that the Plaintiff’s payment of bonuses cannot be deemed to have been made on December 26 of each month, respectively.

After all, bb, c is provided by section 63-2(2) and (3) of the former Restriction of Special Taxation Act.

Since bb, ccca from November 5, 2007, is included in the relocated head office's work.

Until December 31, 2007, 40,100 won paid until December 31, 2007 shall be included in the percentage for calculating the income subject to corporate tax reduction and exemption as the wage earned after the relocated relocated number of employees at the relocated head office. Nevertheless, the disposition of this case that calculated the reduction and exemption rate is unlawful.

(v) a reasonable amount of tax;

bbb and Cc have been paid from November 5, 2007 to December 31, 2007 to the relocated head office.

The plaintiff shall be calculated as shown in the following table 3, including the benefit received after the number of people has been transferred:

Since the rate of reduction and exemption of corporate tax for the business year 2007 is 22.31%, the following table 4 shall apply thereto:

The corporate tax (including additional tax) for the business year 2007 calculated by the plaintiff is KRW 768,064,388.

The Defendant’s imposition disposition of KRW 1,038,095,85 of corporate tax for the business year 2007 against the Plaintiff on March 28, 2013 exceeds KRW 768,064,38 of corporate tax for the business year 2007 should be revoked as it is unlawful.

(Attached Form)

Relevant statutes

/ former Restriction of Special Taxation Act (amended by Act No. 8827 of Dec. 31, 2007)

Article 63-2 (Temporary Special Tax Abatement or Exemption for Relocation of Corporation's Factory and Head Office Outside Seoul Metropolitan Area)

(1) Paragraph (2) shall apply to a corporation that meets the requirements under each of the following subparagraphs (hereafter in this Article, referred to as a "corporation relocated to an

Corporate tax may be reduced or exempted pursuant to paragraphs (4): Provided, That the consumptive service business, the Presidential Decree;

The same shall not apply to any corporation that runs the real estate business and construction business prescribed in this Act.

1. Business or three years, with factory facilities installed in the overconcentration control region in the Seoul Metropolitan area for at least three consecutive years;

It shall have continuously established its headquarters or principal office (hereafter in this Article, referred to as the “head office”).

2. An area outside the Seoul Metropolitan area or its head office (where factory facilities are relocated to another Metropolitan City).

It shall be limited to the industrial complex under the Industrial Sites and Development Act; hereafter in this Article the same shall apply).

The business shall be commenced by relocating not later than December 31, 2008 under the conditions as prescribed by the Presidential Decree or the capital

It shall build a new factory or head office not later than December 31, 201 to commence business in an area other than the jurisdiction (public

The site for the head or the head office shall be retained not later than December 31, 2008 and shall belong to the division on December 31, 2008.

(2) Where a transfer plan is submitted at the time of filing the tax base return

(2) Any corporation relocated to any area outside the Seoul Metropolitan area for the taxable year in which the date of the transfer falls and the following:

In the case of a taxable year ending within 4 years from the beginning date of the taxable year, the full amount of the corporate tax, and

tax amount equivalent to 50/100 of the corporate tax for the taxable year ending within 2 years of such

shall be relieved.

1. Income accruing from a factory, in case where the factory is relocated;

2. In case of the relocated head office, the smaller ratio among item (a) or (c) shall be multiplied by each taxable year.

income equivalent to the amount calculated by

(a) Transfer of the rights to acquire land, buildings and real estate from the tax base for the relevant taxable year;

An amount obtained by subtracting the following:

(b) The total amount of salaries received after relocation by the employees working at the relocated head office for the taxable year concerned.

the rate of annual salary to the total annual salary

(c) The employees working at the relocated head office within the Seoul Metropolitan area and at the relocated head office;

- 14 -

The ratio occupied in the total number of persons (if the ratio is less than 50/100, it shall be zero.

shall be deemed)

3. The amount computed by adding up the incomes under subparagraphs 1 and 2, in cases where the factory and the head office are moved together.

(c) Income in the corresponding taxable year: Provided, That it shall be limited to the income amount;

(3) In applying paragraph (2) 2, the number of employees working at the relocated head office means any area other than the Seoul Metropolitan area

The number of regular employees engaged in the head office affairs at the relocated head office (hereafter referred to as the " relocated head office" in this Article)

An annual average number of persons (referring to the number of persons as of the end of each month and calculated by dividing it by the number of the relevant months, and

The main project in an area outside the Seoul Metropolitan Area after the taxable year in which the two years retroactively from the date of transfer falls;

from the date of relocation to the relocated office (excluding the number of employees relocated to the relocated office)

at the relocated head office for the taxable year to which the date on which three years have elapsed belongs;

The number calculated by subtracting the annual average number of employees of the headquarters in the Seoul Metropolitan Area shall mean the number of employees of the headquarters;

The term "annual average number of regular employees engaged in the head office affairs within the Seoul Metropolitan area after the relocation of the company."

In cases of the taxable year to which the date of relocation belongs, the annual average number shall be calculated based on the number of employees.

Finally.