Seoul High Court-2014-Nu67620 (Law No. 12, 2015)

(A) The taxpayer has the burden of proving that the omitted sales amount is not the omitted sales amount if the omitted sales amount was deposited in the borrowed account.

(C) If a taxpayer fails to prove that the amount deposited in the name account of the representative of the corporation is not the sales that belongs to the relevant business year, it is legitimate to impose tax including the gross income of the relevant business year, unless there is a special reason to the contrary, unless the taxpayer proves that the amount deposited in the name account is not the sales that belongs to the relevant business year.

Article 15 of the former Corporate Tax Act

2015Du45960 Revocation of Disposition of Levying Tax, etc.

AA

a) the Director of the Tax Office

October 15, 2019

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

All of the records of this case and the judgment of the court below and the grounds of appeal were examined, but the assertion on the grounds of appeal by the appellant is clear that it falls under Article 4 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure for Appeal, and thus, the appeal is dismissed under Article 5 of the above Act. It is so decided as per