doping Co., Ltd. (Law Firm Seoil, Attorneys Ahn Byung-hee et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

Samsung Head of Samsung Tax Office

June 11, 2009

Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2008Guhap921 Decided September 12, 2008

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked. The defendant's disposition of collecting KRW 35,688,290 from the original earned income of the plaintiff as of March 1, 2007 shall be revoked.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasoning for the court’s explanation concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance except for the following higher portion among the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, it is accepted in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

A. On the 2nd page, the “Notice of Change in Income Amount” was amended to the “Notice of Change in Income Amount on August 1, 2006” (hereinafter “Notification of Change in Income Amount”).

B. On the 2nd page, the amendment was made to “a correction and notification (hereinafter “instant disposition”)” to “a notice to pay” (hereinafter “instant collection disposition”).

C. The following part of the 3rd page 4’s “No. 10” was added to “No. 16-2”

D. Change of the “instant disposition” in Chapter 3 8 to the “instant collection disposition”

(e) from 3 pages 9 to 5 up to 2 pages 3:

(b) Determination

In cases where the tax authorities' disposition of income and the notice of change in the amount of income accrued therefrom are given, the corporation that is the withholding agent shall be deemed to have paid the amount of income to the person to whom the income recorded in the notice was given on the date of receipt of the notice of change in the amount of income, and at the same time the liability to pay withholding income is established, and the corporation that is the withholding agent bears the obligation to pay the amount of withholding tax according to the contents of the disposition of income recorded in the notice of change in the amount of income to the head of the competent tax office by the 10th day of the following month. If the person fails to pay it, it shall be subject to penalty and criminal punishment. In light of the fact that the notice of change in the amount of income is an act of the tax authorities directly affecting the corporate tax liability, and it is reasonable to deem that the notice of change in the amount of income is an administrative disposition directly affected by the tax authorities (see Supreme Court en banc Decision 2002Du1878, Apr. 20, 2006).

However, the plaintiff did not dispute at the time of the notice of change in the amount of income in this case, without any assertion as to the unique defects of the collection disposition in this case, and there is only dispute about the specific contents of the notice of change in the amount of income in this case. Thus, the collection disposition in this case cannot be deemed unlawful unless the notice of change in the amount of income in this case is null and void. Furthermore, even if the defendant's judgment was erroneous as to whether the notice of change in the amount of income in this case was received through the actual transaction, it is only a ground for revocation of the notice of change in the amount of income in this case, and it cannot be deemed that the plaintiff's claim in this case is not acceptable without any further review.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Kim Jong-sung (Presiding Justice)