Whether the imposition of additional tax on non-regular workers' payment records is legitimate.

Even if a non-regular worker is not subject to full-time withholding, if there are other income, it is necessary to levy taxes by summing up it. Therefore, there is still a need to prepare and submit a written payment record.

Article 120 of the Corporate Tax Act [Duty to Submit Payment Record]

Article 20 [Scope of Daily Employed Workers]

1. All appeals filed by the plaintiff and the defendant are dismissed.

2. Costs of appeal shall be borne by each person.

1. Purport of claim

The defendant's imposition of value-added tax by the year to which each item of value-added tax belongs in the tax calculation table (attached Form 1) made on December 15, 2003 against the plaintiff and the imposition of penalty tax not submitted for each business year in the tax calculation table (attached Form 1) shall be revoked, respectively.

2. Purport of appeal

The part against the plaintiff in the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked. The defendant's imposition of additional tax on the plaintiff on December 1, 2003 (attached Form 1) which was made against the plaintiff on December 1, 2003 shall be revoked.

: Cancellation of the part of the judgment of the first instance, and the plaintiff's claim corresponding to the above cancellation shall be dismissed.

The reasoning for the court's explanation concerning this case is as follows: "At least 100 hours per month" in Section 2, Section 15 of the judgment of the court of first instance and "at least 3 months" in Section 8, Section 19 of the Civil Procedure Act mean "at least 100 hours per month, this refers to workers who meet all the short-termness of the day or hour unit and the period of employment" in Section 19 of the judgment of the court of first instance, and "at the same time as the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance, where the period of employment is short-term when calculating the period of employment on the basis of the day or hour unit or time unit or the work performance of the hour unit" are as stated in Section 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure

Therefore, the judgment of the first instance is legitimate, and all appeals by the plaintiff and the defendant are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.

[Attachment 1]

Table of Tax Calculation

Value-added Tax

Year

Amount of taxation disposition (won)

For the second period, 1998

3,585,890

For the second period of 1999

57,631,200

For the first term, 2000

76,612,880

For the second period, 2000

8,823,300

For the first term, 2001

98,381,940

For the second period, 2001

9,858,290

For the first term, 2002

179,555,630

For the second period, 2002

82,142,670

Total

716,591,800

Corporate Tax

Business year

Amount of taxation disposition (won)

Additional tax to be filed without filing the payment record

1998

121,423,540

114,751,110

199

26,458,730

199,183,735

200

843,782,140

242,276,921

201

663,891,980

135,816,601

202

747,941,250

160,660,960

Total

2,603,497,640

852,689,327

Finally.