The legitimacy of the assertion that the disposition of bonus on the omission in sale is the return of the claim for provisional payment

It is difficult to believe that there exists a claim for provisional deposit, as alleged by the Plaintiff, and even if there exists a claim for provisional deposit, there is no evidence to support that the Plaintiff repaid the obligation to repay provisional deposit to Kim○-○ in the purchase price for facilities and equipment, etc. 380,000,000 won. Thus, there is no reason to support this part of the Plaintiff’s assertion.

Article 67 (Disposition of Income)

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

피고가 2007. ##.##. 원고에 대하여 한 2003년분 근로소득세 129,683,270원의 부과처분을 취소한다.

1. Details of the disposition;

The following facts may be admitted by each entry in Gap evidence 1, 2, 29 (including each number), and Eul evidence 1 through 6 (including each number):

가. 원고와 신○○(원고 대표이사인 김○○의 처임)은 2003. ##. ##. 이○○(다만 부동산 검인계약서상 매수인 명의는 이○○의 처인 이○○으로 하였다.)에게 신○○ 소유의 ○○시 ○구 ○○동 ###-###, 같은 동 ###-### 각 토지 및 그 지상 건물과 원고 소유의 토지, 건물을 제외한 시설장치, 차량, 허가권(이하 '시설장치 등'이라고 한다.)을 1,060,000,000원에 매도하였다.(이하 '이 사건 매매계약'이라고 한다.).

나. 피고는 위 매매대금 1,060,000,000원 중 380,000,000원을 원고 소유의 시설장치 등에 대한 가액으로 보아 원고가 위 금원 상당을 매출누락 하였다고 판단하고, 원고의 위 2003년 매출누락액 380,000,000원이 사외유출된 것으로서 귀속이 불분명하다는 이유로 2006. ##. ##. 원고 대표이사인 김○○에게 위 금원 상당을 상여 처분하는 내용의 소득금액변동통지를 하였고, 2007. ##. ##. 원고에게 2003년 귀속 근로소득세 원천징수 분 129,683,270원을 경정 · 고지하였다(이하 '이 사건 처분'이라고 한다.).

다. 이에 대하여 원고는 2007. ##. ##. 국세심판원에 심판청구를 하였으나 2007. ##. ##. 기가되었다.

2. Determination of legality of disposition

A. The plaintiff's assertion

Inasmuch as at the time of concluding the instant sales contract with ○○○, the newly owned land was calculated as KRW 2,200,000 per square day, and only the land price was agreed to be KRW 1,060,000 and the Plaintiff-owned facilities, equipment, etc. were to be transferred free of charge, the instant disposition, based on the premise that the Plaintiff failed to sell KRW 380,000,000 for the value of the facilities, equipment, etc. out of the above sales price, is unlawful, and the value of the facilities, equipment, etc. owned by the Plaintiff was recognized as KRW 380,00,000, and the said amount was deemed to have been reverted to ○○, the Plaintiff’s representative director, even if this was deemed to have been paid as bonus, and thus, the instant disposition is unlawful, and thus, the instant disposition is unlawful.

(b) Related statutes;

It is as shown in the attached Table related statutes.

(c) Fact of recognition;

The following facts are not disputed between the parties, or may be acknowledged by considering the whole purport of the pleadings as a whole in the entries in Gap evidence 2, 18, 61, Gap evidence 3-1 through 3, Gap evidence 29-5, and Eul evidence 6:

(1) 원고의 대표이사인 김○○은 1998. ##. ##. 자신의 처인 신○○ 명의로 ○○시 ○구 ○○동 ###-###, 같은 동 ### 각 토지(합계 550평) 및 그 지상 건물을 낙찰 받았고, 그 곳에서 폐수 등 처리 업을 영위하다가 2003. ##. ##. 폐업신고를 하였다.

(2) 2003. ##. ##.자 이 사건 매매계약서에는 '매도인 1 : 원고, 매도인 2 : 신○○, 매수인 : 이○○'이라고 기재되어 있고, 그 아래에는 '위 매수인은 ○구 ○○#동 ###-###, 같은 동 ###-### 소재 매도인 1 소유 폐수처리 업 관련 허가권, 시설 등 및 매도인 2 소유 토지, 건물에 대하여 매매계약을 체결'한다는 내용이 기재되어 있으며, 제1조에는 '매매대금은 일금 일십억 육천만 원(1,060,000,000원)으로 한다. 다만 폐수처리 업 관련시설, 차량 등 명의이전에 관련된 제비용(연체된 배출부과금 포함)은 매수인의 부담으로 한다'라고 기재되어 있다.

(3) ○○시 ○구 ○○동 ###-###, 같은 동 ### 각 토지 및 그 지상 건물에 대한 부동산 검인계약서에는 매도인은 토지 및 건물의 등기명의자인 위 신○○, 매수인은 이○○의 처인 이○○으로 되어 있고, 매매대금은 680,000,000원으로 되어 있다.

(4) 이 사건 매매계약 당시 ○○시 ○구 ○○동 ###-###, 같은 동 ### 각 토지의 개별공시지가는 각 323,000원/㎡이었고, 2005. ##.경 개별공시지가는 각 298,000원/㎡, 시세는 평당 1,200,000원~1,300,000원 정도이었다.

(5) According to the Plaintiff’s settlement of accounts in 2002 and 2003, each of the assets of KRW 137,000,000 for mechanical devices in 2002, KRW 125,000 for vehicle transport equipment, KRW 125,000 for vehicle transport equipment, KRW 280,000 for industrial property rights, KRW 00 for vehicle transport equipment in 2003, KRW 13,000 for vehicle transport equipment in 203, KRW 16,000 for vehicle transport equipment in 200 for industrial property rights, KRW 16,000,000 for industrial property rights.

D. Determination

(1) 이 사건 매매계약을 체결함에 있어 원고가 이○○에게 시설장치 등을 무상으로 양도하였다는 취지의 원고의 주장에 대하여 살피건대, 이 사건 매매계약서에 등기부상 토지 및 건물의 소유자인 신○○ 이외에 원고도 매도인으로 함께 기재되어 있는 사실, 토지 및 건물에 관한 부동산 등기용 검인계약서에는 원고 대표이사 김○○의 처인 신○○만이 매도인으로 기재되어 있고 매매대금란에 680,000,000원이라고 기재되어 있는 사실, 원고의 2002년도 법인결산서에는 기계장치 등 총 280,000,000원의 자산이 계상되어 있었는데 2003년도 법인결산서에는 차량운반구 등 총 29,000,000원의 자산만이 계상되어 있는 사실은 앞서 본 바와 같고, 위 인정사실에 이 사건 매매계약 당시 ○○시 ○구 ○○동 ###-###, 같은 동 ### 각 토지의 시세가 평당 각 2,200,000원에 미치지 못하는 것으로 보이는 범 등을 종합해 보면 원고의 위 주장에 부합하는 듯 한 갑 제4, 60호증의 각 기재는 그대로 믿기 어렵고, 갑 제2, 5 내지 8, 10 내지 17, 19 내지 21, 27, 30 내지 41, 50 내지 56(각 가지번호 포함)의 각 기재만으로는 위 주장사실을 인정하기에 부족하며 달리 이를 인정할만한 증거가 없으므로, 원고의 위 주장은 이유 없다.

(2) Next, even if the value of the facilities and equipment owned by the Plaintiff on domestic affairs is recognized as KRW 380,00,000, and the above amount is deemed to have been reverted to Kim○○, the representative director of the Plaintiff, and even if it is not paid as bonus, it is difficult to believe that the Plaintiff’s claim against the Plaintiff should have been returned, as alleged by the Plaintiff, on the part of the Plaintiff’s assertion that Kim○○ should not be deemed to have been paid as bonus, and on the other hand, the statement on the evidence No. 18 is sufficient to believe that the claim against the Plaintiff exists as alleged by the Plaintiff. Even if there was a claim against provisional deposit, there is no evidence to support that the Plaintiff paid 380,000,000 won for the purchase price for the facilities and equipment, etc., and there is no ground for

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

Related Acts and subordinate statutes

[Corporate Tax Act (amended by Act No. 8831 of Dec. 31, 2007)]

In filing a report on the tax base of corporate tax on income for each business year pursuant to the provisions of Article 60 or in determining or revising the tax base of corporate tax pursuant to the provisions of Article 66 or 69, the amount included in gross income shall be disposed of as bonus, dividend, other outflow from the company, internal reservation, etc. according to the person to whom it belongs as prescribed by Presidential Decree

【former Enforcement Decree of the Corporate Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 18706 of Feb. 19, 2005)】

§ 106. Disposal of income

(1) The amount included in gross income pursuant to Article 67 of the Act shall be disposed of pursuant to the following subparagraphs:

The same shall also apply to non-profit domestic corporations and non-profit foreign corporations.

1. Where the amount included in the calculation of earnings has clearly leaked out of the company, the dividends, bonuses from the disposition of profits, other income, and other outflow from the company under each of the following items according to the person to whom they accrue: Provided, That where the accrual is unclear, it shall be deemed as accrual to the representative (where the total number of stocks held by an officer who is not a minority shareholder under the provisions of Article 87 (2) and persons in a special relationship under the provisions of paragraph (4) of the same Article is 30% or more of the total number of stocks issued or total investment amount of the relevant corporation and the officer actually controls the operation of the corporation, he shall be deemed the representative, and where a corporation has reported that there is a separate representative from among the officers who are stockholders, etc., who represent the relevant corporation, the reported person shall be the representative, and where there are 2 or more representatives, the de facto representative; hereinafter the same shall apply):

(a) Where the person to whom benefits accrue is a stockholder, etc. (excluding a stockholder who is an executive officer or employee), the dividends of such person to the person to whom benefits accrue;

(b) If the person to whom it belongs is an officer or employee, the bonus to the person to whom it reverts;

(c) Where the person to whom the income accrues is a corporation or an individual operating the business, other outflow from the company: Provided, That it shall be limited to cases where the distributed profit constitutes the income of a domestic corporation or a domestic business place of a foreign corporation under the provisions of Article 94 of the Act or the business income of a resident or a non-resident

(d) Other income of the person to whom it belongs, if the person to whom it belongs is not a person under items (a) through (c).