Plaintiff (Law Firm Rate, Attorneys So-young et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Sung-dong Tax Office (Attorneys Han Han-chul et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

September 2, 2005

Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2004Guhap18849 delivered on December 22, 2004

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

1. Purport of claim

The Defendant’s disposition of imposing KRW 583,417,700 on the Plaintiff on December 12, 2003 is revoked.

2. Purport of appeal

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

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The court's reasoning concerning this case is to add "The defendant cannot determine any provision similar to that of the former Income Tax Act and the former Corporate Tax Act because it differs from each other," to the same level, and to train taxation data by obtaining legal evidence from the same level. It is much more necessary to impose sanctions in cases where evidence other than legal evidence is not received than in cases where evidence other than legal evidence is received, and it is much more necessary to impose additional tax on lack of legal evidence even in cases where evidence is not received, considering equity with corporate entrepreneurs."

2. Conclusion

Therefore, the judgment of the first instance court is just in conclusion, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit.

Judges Song Jin-jin (Presiding Judge)