Determination of the fact that goods brokerage commission presented at the expense of outside the country is admitted as deductible expenses.

The testimony of a witness corresponding to the fact that he/she has paid as a product brokerage fee is not trustable, it is not sufficient to recognize it, and there is no other evidence to recognize it.

Article 19 (Scope of Deductible Expenses)

Article 19 of the Enforcement Decree of the Corporate Tax Act

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The defendant's disposition of imposition of corporate tax of KRW 9,062,200 against the plaintiff on April 1, 2006 shall be revoked.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. In the second taxable period of 2002, the Plaintiff received purchase tax invoices of KRW 101,209,000 without real transactions from ○○ Company during the second taxable period, and included the value in deductible expenses at the time of filing corporate tax returns for the business year 2002. The Plaintiff requested the Defendant to explain the above purchase tax invoices in deductible expenses, and requested the Defendant to recognize the total amount of KRW 84,340,780 as deductible expenses, including the amount of KRW 35,165,00,000, and the amount of KRW 24,340,780,000, which is not originally included in deductible expenses, and the revised corporate tax return was filed on April 18, 2005.

B. On April 1, 2006, the Defendant recognized the Plaintiff’s assertion as deductible expenses for benefits, rents, and management expenses, but did not recognize the payment of the key amount as deductible expenses and determined and notified the Plaintiff of corporate tax 9,062,200 for the business year 2002 (hereinafter the instant disposition).

[Ground of Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, 2, 3 and Eul evidence 1-9

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The key issue amount is the amount that ○○ and Ma○○ paid to them as a price for mediating the transaction of goods, such as a bank, and the expense should be included in deductible expenses. However, the disposition of this case reported differently is unlawful.

B. Determination

In filing a return on the tax base and amount of corporate tax, the taxpayer voluntarily omitted some of the expenses to be included in deductible expenses and under-reported return is in accordance with empirical rule. As such, the existence and amount of expenses should be determined by the verification of the taxpayer who asserts the inclusion of such expenses in deductible expenses (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 91Nu10695, Jul. 28, 1992).

With respect to this case, the testimony by the witness Ma○○, which corresponds to the fact that the Plaintiff sold the goods, such as a bank, and the Plaintiff paid the key amount to this ○○ and Ma○○○○○ under the pretext of the brokerage commission, is not believed, but is insufficient to recognize it only with the descriptions of the evidence No. 8-1 through 4, and evidence No. 9-1 through No. 14, and there is no other evidence to recognize it, the disposition of this case, which included the key amount in deductible expenses, is legitimate.

3. Conclusion

Thus, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed for lack of reason.