Seoul High Court 2016Nu65468 (2017.07)

(A) An act of a substantial manager to divert a corporation's funds shall constitute an act of outflow from the company as an expenditure itself to the amount, unless there are special circumstances.

Since it is reasonable to see that the Plaintiff was actually silent or ratified with the knowledge of the embezzlement, such embezzlement shall be deemed immediately to have been disclosed from the company, and it shall not be deemed that the amount equivalent to the withdrawal was taken by others after a considerable period of time after the embezzlement.

2017du568 Notice of change in income amount and revocation of revocation thereof.

AAAA

BB Director of the Tax Office

July 7, 2017

November 9, 2017

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

Examining the judgment of the court below and the grounds of appeal, the ground of appeal by appellant is examined.

Since it is apparent that there is no reason for falling under Article 4 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Law, an appeal under Article 5 of that Act

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