The case holding that it is necessary to determine the estimated investigation of import related to the rental deposit of the building owned by the joint owner.

Even if a co-owned building was leased to another place and its account books, etc. were kept on the spot from the head of the competent tax office having received lease deposit from the lessee and used it in another place and did not keep it at the same time, the account books and documentary evidence necessary for calculating the source of use or the source of income therefrom are not provided, which constitutes "when there is no necessary account books and documentary evidence in calculating the tax base" as prescribed in Article 120 of the Income Tax Act and Article 169 (1) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, and thus, the income related to the lease deposit should be determined by estimation.

Article 120 of the Income Tax Act, Article 169(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act

Plaintiff

Head of Sungbuk Tax Office

Seoul High Court Decision 85Gu867 delivered on March 20, 1986

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

1. We examine the Plaintiff’s ground of appeal No. 1.

According to the records, the fact-finding of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is no error in the misconception of facts due to the violation of the rules of evidence or the incomplete hearing.

2. We examine the second ground for appeal.

Even if the Plaintiff received from the head of the competent tax office on the spot inspection on the leased income of the Plaintiff while leasing the above building under his joint ownership by keeping the account books, etc., if the Plaintiff did not keep the leased income amounting to KRW 95,00,00 from the lessee in any other place while using it at the same time, the account books and documentary evidence necessary for calculating the place of use or any income accrued therefrom, it is not possible to determine the estimated income related to the rental deposit as it falls under the case where there is no necessary account books and documentary evidence in calculating the tax base, and thus, it is not necessary to determine the estimated income tax base by applying the above standard income ratio, and in this case, the method of calculating the rental deposit by the interest rate of one-year fixed deposit in accordance with Article 29(1) of the Income Tax Act and Article 58(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act, barring any special circumstance, shall be determined not by the method of income-based investigation but by multiplying the necessary expenses corresponding to the rental fee by the income-based ratio.

3. Therefore, this appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Park Jong-dong (Presiding Justice)