Plaintiff (Law Firm TelviS, Attorneys Choi Won-ro, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

The head of Yangcheon Tax Office

November 17, 2009

Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2008Guhap30861 Decided April 23, 2009

The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked. The defendant shall revoke the disposition imposing global income tax of KRW 105,618,400 on the plaintiff on December 1, 2006.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasoning of the judgment of this court is as follows, and it is stated in the judgment of the court of first instance except in the following cases. Thus, it is accepted in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Parts to be dried;

4. The 12th page "29,220,00 won" is added to "the above 424,600,000 won-127,380,000 won (the amount stated as the purchase obligation in the report of settlement of accounts of the company of this case not appropriated as purchase liability in the report of settlement of accounts in 2004 and paid in cash in the return of settlement of accounts in 204)."

4 pages 13-14 "The above KRW 290,7220,00" shall be applied to "the above KRW 422,460,00".

The 6th 5th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 5th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 1000,000.

The 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 7th 7th 9-10th 10th 10-11th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 7

6th 8th 6th 8th 2th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 200

8. The following shall be added to nine pages 9:

[As seen earlier, the Plaintiff appeared in Seodaemun-gu Office and was investigated on April 18, 2005 and stated that the management right of the instant company exists to himself/herself. There are no circumstances to doubt the credibility of the above statement, and if the Plaintiff was merely a nominal representative director, it is difficult to find any particular reason for Nonparty 1 to receive the transfer of all shares owned by him/her (the Plaintiff paid securities transaction tax, etc. to Nonparty 1 in relation to the said stock transaction).]

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Yoon Jae-ho (Presiding Judge) (Presiding Judge)