logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2015.08.28 2014구합18589
종합소득세부과처분취소
Text

1. Of the instant lawsuit, KRW 217,882,561, supra, the Defendant’s global income tax for the year 2006 owed to the Plaintiff on August 8, 2013.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. From August 1, 2005 to December 6, 2005, the Plaintiff engaged in financial and credit business under the trade name “B” and “C” from May 23, 2007 to January 17, 2008.

B. The Plaintiff loaned the funds to Crobte Esteve Estetra (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) around 2006 and received the interest from the Nonparty Company totaling KRW 434,642,772 (hereinafter “the interest of this case”) over 12 occasions as follows.

C. On August 8, 2013, the Defendant decided and notified the Plaintiff of the instant amount of global income tax of KRW 267,967,063 ( KRW 115,981,349, KRW 73,280,71, KRW 78,704,943, which was the global income tax of KRW 2006, by applying standard expense rate (15.7%) on the ground that the instant interest constituted business income of finance and credit business.

(hereinafter “instant original disposition”) D.

On November 6, 2013, the Plaintiff filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal, and the said appeal was dismissed on July 24, 2014.

E. During the instant lawsuit pending, the Defendant rendered a decision of correction that ex officio reduces KRW 50,084,502 out of KRW 73,280,771 of the initial additional tax on negligent tax returns, on the ground that there was an error in calculating the amount of additional tax on negligent tax returns during the instant disposition (hereinafter “instant decision of reduction”).

[The disposition of imposition imposed by the Defendant on August 8, 2013 by the Plaintiff on August 8, 2013 shall be KRW 217,882,561 of global income tax for the year 2006 ( KRW 115,981,349 of this tax, KRW 23,196,269 of additional tax on negligent tax returns, KRW 78,704,943 of additional tax, and KRW 78,704,943 of the above disposition of imposition). The above disposition of imposition shall be referred to as "the disposition of imposition of this case"] [the grounds for recognition] without any dispute, the entries in Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1, 2, 4, and 5 (including

2. The part seeking revocation of the instant reduction decision among the instant lawsuit is lawful, ex officio, to seek revocation of the instant reduction decision from the instant lawsuit.

arrow