Suwon District Court-2016-Gu Partnership-68268 ( October 17, 2018)

Whether the actual representative of the corporation of this case is the plaintiff

There is no fact that the Plaintiff received monthly certain amount of wages from the corporation of this case, nor did the Plaintiff directly raised the establishment fund at the time of incorporation of the corporation. Thus, the Plaintiff cannot be deemed as the actual representative of the corporation of

Article 106 of the Enforcement Decree of Corporate Tax Act

2018Nu33793

KimA

BB Director of the Tax Office

Suwon District Court Decision 2016Guhap68268 Decided January 17, 2018

May 10, 2018

June 14, 2018

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

1. Purport of claim

Defendant’s global income tax amounting to KRW 000,000,000 for the year 2010 on March 26, 2016 (reported)

A disposition to impose penalty tax of KRW 00,000,00 for unfaithful payment, including additional tax of KRW 00,000,000 for unfaithful payment

(c)

2. Purport of appeal

The judgment of the first instance is revoked. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

1. cite of the reasons for the written judgment in the first instance;

The reasoning of this Court is that the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the reasons for this case.

It shall be quoted in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Court Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Conclusion

Since the judgment of the first instance is justifiable, the defendant's appeal is dismissed as it is groundless.