Seoul Administrative Court 2013Guhap3917 ( October 14, 2013)

The exclusion period from the bonus disposal of income tax due to the embezzlement of corporate funds shall be five years;

Even though there was an intention to evade corporate tax, it is reasonable to view that it is difficult to view that it is difficult to avoid the comprehensive income tax on the bonus to be reverted to them, as it is anticipated that the income disposition by the tax authorities should also be made as a result of subsequent embezzlement or omission of sales on the embezzlement.

2013Nu4570 Notice of change in amount of income

AAAA Corporation

Head of Central Tax Office

Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2013Guhap3917 decided June 14, 2013

Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2013Guhap3917 decided June 14, 2013

May 13, 2014

May 13, 2014

May 27, 2014

Note. Do.

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Kim Jong-Un Kim

May 27, 2014

주문ｾ

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. Costs of appeal are borne by the Defendant.

.

Purport of claim and appeal

1. Purport of claim

A. The primary purport of the claim

Income amounts listed in the separate sheet No. 1 attached to the defendant against the plaintiff on March 29, 2011 and April 8, 2011.

Notice of any liquid change shall be deemed null and void.

B. Preliminary purport of claim

Income amounts listed in the separate sheet No. 1 attached to the defendant against the plaintiff on March 29, 2011 and April 8, 2011.

Judgment that entirely revokes the notification of liquid change;

2. Purport of appeal

The judgment of the first instance is revoked, and attached Form 1 that the defendant against the plaintiff on March 29, 2011 and April 8, 2011

The income earner in the notice of change in the list of each income amount shall be dismissed, and the plaintiff shall be dismissed.

The judgment dismissing the remaining claims

이유ｾ

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasoning for this Court’s explanation is as follows: Section 3(c)(3) of the first instance judgment.

The Administrative Litigation Act is the same as the entry of each corresponding part of the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance except for the same modification.

Article 8 (2) of this Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act shall be cited as it is.

2. Parts to be corrected;

3) Determination

A) In light of the aforementioned legal principles and the legislative history of Article 26-2(1)1 of the Framework Act on National Taxes

In light of the above legal principles, in this case where the former Framework Act on National Taxes applies, the above provision

It should be interpreted, and according to the facts above, CCC and BB corporate tax.

aside from the existence of the intent to evade, even if there is no intention to evade, the embezzlement of them here.

tax authority's action as to the subsequent embezzlement or omission of sales

the disposition is expected to be made and thus, a comprehensive claim on the bonus to be reverted to them.

It is reasonable to see that it is difficult to regard it as an evasion of income tax, and such an evasion of income tax.

Whether the existence of intention is clear that the income amount in this case, and whether the CCC and BB are not known;

Whether the Plaintiff is in a position to exercise overall control over the overall management of the AA Group as an affiliate;

D. It cannot be viewed that there is any change in terms of

On the other hand, according to Article 26-2 (1) 2 of the former Framework Act on National Taxes, a taxpayer shall file a legal report.

If a return of tax base is not filed within Korea, the date on which the national tax is assessable.

The exclusion period of 7 years from the disposition of income is applied by the taxpayer.

Tax base return on global income for the taxable year in which embezzlements from the company have accrued its income;

If the statement is filed within the statutory due date of return, the amount of global income on the tax base return shall be

Even if such embezzlement is not included, "the taxpayer shall file a tax base within the statutory reporting period."

It can not be seen as a case of failure to submit a written complaint (Supreme Court Decision 2010. 2010).

1.28 According to each of the statements in sub-paragraph 5-1 and 2 of sub-paragraph 5, 207Du20959, see Supreme Court Decision 2007Du20959,

CCC and BB shall file a tax base return on global income tax in 2000 to 2004 within the statutory due date of return.

the facts submitted may be recognized.

Therefore, as to the global income tax of CCC and BB caused by each disposition of the instant case

section 26-2(1)1 of the former Framework Act on National Taxes means fraud or other unlawful act by a taxpayer.

(1) or (2) or (3) or (3) or (4) or (2) or (3) or (3) or (4) or (3) or

(1) If a person fails to file a return of tax base within the statutory reporting period, it shall be deemed that the person constitutes "cases where

Therefore, the exclusion period of five years shall be applied in accordance with subparagraph 3 of the same paragraph.

B) Meanwhile, a taxation disposition, which was made after the limitation period of the imposition of national taxes has expired, shall be deemed null and void.

Supreme Court Decision 99Du3140 Decided June 22, 199, Supreme Court Decision 2003Du203 Decided June 10, 2004

Article 26-2(4) of the former Framework Act on National Taxes (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 1752, Feb. 2, 2007)

28. According to Article 12-3 (1) 1 of the Act, a general factory is established pursuant to Article 12-3 (1) 1 of the Act

National taxes, such as acquisition tax, on which the tax base and amount of tax are reported, shall be the tax base and amount of the national

The day following the due date for the return of the tax return is the day on which national taxes can be imposed, and the former Income Tax Act ( December 31, 2005) can be imposed.

According to Article 70 (1) of the Act, the deadline for filing global income tax shall be the deadline for filing the global income tax.

May 31 of the year following the taxable period, and 2000 to 2004 for interest-raising and interest-raising;

The exclusion period for imposition of five years on global income tax shall be June 1, 2001, June 1, 2002, June 1, 2002, and June 1, 2003; and

6.1. On June 1, 2005, it shall proceed, and the notice of any change in the income amount of this case shall be five years from the initial date of the calculation;

This was completed on March 29, 201 and April 8, 2001.

Therefore, the notice of change in each income amount of this case was made after the exclusion period expires.

It should be null and void.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the judgment of the first instance court is justifiable, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed, and it is so ordered as per Disposition.

partnership.