208Guhap1498 Notice of Revocation of Disposition of Change in Income Amount

School juristic person 000

Seoul Regional Tax Office

June 3, 2008

June 24, 2008

1. On January 13, 2006, the defendant's notice of change in the amount of income in KRW 6,186, 187, and 840 against the plaintiff shall be revoked.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

The order is as set forth in the text.

1. Details of the disposition;

The following facts are not disputed between the parties, or before pleadings are made on the statements in Gap evidence 1 (the same as Eul evidence 5-5), Eul evidence 2, Eul evidence 2-2, Eul evidence 5-1 through 4, 6, Eul evidence 9:

the purpose of this chapter.

A. The defendant calculated the difference between May 10, 2005 to June 20, 20, 2000 won A (hereinafter referred to as "A"), 30,000 won per 60 won per 3,00 won per 60 won per 60 won per 30,000 won per 60 won per 60,00 won per 20,000 won per 36,00 won per 60 won per 60,00 won per 36,00 won per 60,000 won per 60,000 won per 60,000 won per 20,000 won per 6,00 won per 30,000 won per 6,00 won per 60,00 won per 60,00 won per 60,00 won per 60,000 won per 6,00 won per stock per 20,000 won per stock transfer.

B. On December 9, 2005, the director of the Gwangju District Tax Office decided and notified the Plaintiff of the above KRW 10,583, 256, and 320 as corporate tax for the business year (from March 1, 2001 to February 28, 2002) 5, 727, 020, and 480.

C. On March 10, 2006, the Plaintiff filed an appeal with the National Tax Tribunal for the notification of changes in the amount of income and the revocation of the disposition imposing corporate tax. On January 9, 2007, the National Tax Tribunal dismissed a request for adjudication on the disposition imposing corporate tax on the Ministry of National Tax Tribunal on January 9, 2007 on the grounds that the request period expires. On January 9, 2002, a request for adjudication on the disposition imposing corporate tax on the notice of changes in the amount of income, the time of the transfer of stocks in this case was the remainder settlement date, and on January 28, 2002, a contract for the transfer of stocks in this case was concluded on December 28, 2001, not on December 28, 2001, the reasonable value of the stocks in this case was assessed pursuant to Article 63

D. Accordingly, on February 7, 2007, the Defendant rendered a notice of change in the amount of income by reducing the bonus disposal amount to KRW 6,186,187, and 840 upon the Plaintiff’s new calculation as of December 28, 2001, based on the purport of the decision of the National Tax Tribunal on February 7, 2007, by reducing the bonus disposal amount to KRW 6,186,187, and 840 (hereinafter “the notice of change in the amount of income stated in the main text against the Plaintiff of the reduced amount”).

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

In accordance with the provisions of Article 192(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act, Article 103(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Corporate Tax Act, etc., the notice of change in the amount of income shall be made by the head of the district tax office or the head of the district tax office having jurisdiction over the place of payment of the corporate tax at the time of the disposition. In the case of corporate tax, the place of payment of corporate tax is the location of the head office or the principal office on donation such as the relevant corporation. The principal office on the Plaintiff’s registry is the location of the head office or the head office on the Plaintiff’s register, and the head office on the Plaintiff’s registry belongs to the director of the regional tax office of Gwangju District or the head office of the regional tax office of the competent tax office of Gwangju who is the head office under his jurisdiction. As such, the Defendant, who

(b) Related statutes;

[2] The former Corporate Tax Act (amended by Act No. 7005 of Dec. 30, 2003; hereinafter the same applies)

Article 9 (Place for Tax Payment)

(1) The place of payment of corporate tax of a domestic corporation shall be the seat of the head or principal office on the registry of the relevant corporation: Provided, That in case of an organization considered as a corporation, it shall be the

Article 12 (Jurisdiction over Taxation)

The corporate tax shall be imposed upon the head of the tax office or the director of the regional tax office having jurisdiction over the place of tax payment as provided in Articles 9 through 11.

Article 66 (Settlement and Correction)

(2) Where a domestic corporation makes a report in accordance with Article 60 falls under any of the following subparagraphs, the superintendent of the district tax office having jurisdiction over the place of tax payment or the Commissioner of the competent Regional Tax Office shall correct the corporate tax base and

1. Where there are errors or omissions in the contents of the report;

2. Where he fails to submit all or part of the payment records under Article 120 or 120-2, or the aggregate table of tax invoices by seller or by seller under Article 121, or the aggregate table of tax invoices by seller under Article 121;

3. Where a legal person designated as one eligible to join a credit card merchant under Article 117 of this Act and Article 32-2 of the Value-Added Tax Act fails to subscribe to a credit card merchant without any justifiable reason, and the details of the report are judged unfaithful in view of the scale of facilities

Article 67 (Disposition of Income)

In filing a report on the corporate tax base on the income for each business year under the provisions of Article 60 or in determining or revising the corporate tax base under the provisions of Article 66 or 69, the amount included in the calculation of earnings shall be disposed of as bonus, dividends, and other internal reserves of the company, etc. according to the person to whom the income belongs,

[Enforcement Decree of the Corporate Tax Act]

Article 103 (Settlement and Correction)

(1) The head of the district tax office having jurisdiction over the place of tax payment shall determine or correct the tax base and amount of tax under Article 66 of the Act: Provided, That with respect to those deemed especially important, the Commissioner of the regional tax office having jurisdiction over the place of tax payment may determine or correct them, and in such cases, the head of the district tax office having jurisdiction over the place of tax payment shall

[Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 17825 of Dec. 30, 2002; hereinafter the same)

Article 192 (Fictitious Payment Date of Dividend Dividend and Other Incomes Obtained by Disposal of Income)

(1) In determining or correcting the corporate income amount pursuant to the Corporate Tax Act, the head of the tax office having jurisdiction over the corporation’s bonus and other income disposed of shall notify the corporation concerned of the change of the income amount as determined by the Ordinance of the Ministry of Finance and Economy within fifteen days from the date of the determination or correction, by the notice of the change of the income amount as determined by the Ordinance of the Ministry of Finance and Economy: Provided, That in case where the location of the corporation is unclear or it is impossible to serve the notice, the stockholder concerned and the resident

(2) In cases under paragraph (1), the relevant dividend bonus and other income shall be deemed paid or recovered from the date when the notice is received.

C. Determination

According to Articles 66(2) and 67 of the Corporate Tax Act and Article 103(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, the chief of the district tax office having jurisdiction over the place of tax payment or the chief of the district tax office having jurisdiction over the place of tax payment shall correct the tax base and amount of corporate tax on income for each business year of a domestic corporation. In this case, the amount included in the calculation of earnings shall be disposed of (income disposition) as prescribed by the Presidential Decree, such as bonus, dividend, other outflow from the company, reservation of company, etc. according to the person to whom the income belongs, and according to Article 192(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act, the chief of the district tax office having jurisdiction over the place of tax payment or the chief of the district tax office having jurisdiction over the place of tax payment shall notify the corporation of the change

In short, the provisions of the Corporate Tax Act, the Enforcement Decree of the same Act and the Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act stipulate that the tax office or the director of a regional tax office having jurisdiction over the place of tax payment shall determine or correct the corporate income of the corporation in question.

Meanwhile, in cases where the tax authority’s disposition of income and a notice of change in the amount of income is given, it is reasonable to view that such notice is an administrative disposition by the tax authority that directly affects the corporate tax liability, and that the tax authority’s disposition of income and the notice of change in the amount of income are deemed to have been paid to the person to whom the income as stated 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 the income tax withheld at that time is established. A withholding agent, as a corporation, bears the obligation to pay the amount of tax withheld according to the details of disposal of income as stated in the notice of change in the amount of income, by the 10th day of the following month. If the notice of change in the amount of income is not carried out, it shall be deemed that the notice of change in the amount of tax is an administrative disposition by the tax authority that directly affects the corporate tax liability, and the provisions of the Enforcement Decree of the Corporate Tax Act that stipulate that the tax authority’s notice of change in the amount of income directly becomes subject to the tax assessment procedure.

Meanwhile, according to Article 9 of the Corporate Tax Act, the place of tax payment of corporate tax of a domestic corporation is the location of the head office or main office on the registry of the relevant corporation, and as seen earlier, the notice of change in income amount shall be given to the head of the tax office or the director of the regional tax office having jurisdiction over the place of tax payment of corporate tax on the relevant corporation. Thus, the authority to dispose of the difference between the legitimate value of the shares of this case and the actual transfer value as bonus to the representative of the plaintiff D and thereby notify the change in income amount to the plaintiff shall be given to the head of the regional tax office

Therefore, the Defendant’s disposition of notifying the change in the amount of income of this case against the Plaintiff on the ground that taxation data was secured in the course of the tax investigation is unlawful as a taxation by an unauthorized administrative agency (see Supreme Court Decisions 2002Da61897, Nov. 10, 2003; 98Du17968, Nov. 26, 199, etc.).

3. Conclusion

Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified and it is decided to accept it, and it is decided as per the disposition.

Judges in fixed form of judge

Judges Park Jong-ho

Judgment Notarial Award