Seoul High Court 201Nu39228 (20 April 20, 2012)

It is reasonable to deem that he/she supplied the processed chickens which was not the raw chickens, but the sediment.

(C) The Plaintiff’s representative director at the time of the tax investigation to prepare and submit a written confirmation that the Plaintiff’s representative director omitted sales, and the written confirmation was prepared against the intent of the representative director or the objective truth of the contents of the written confirmation is not observed.

2012du 11799 Revocation of Disposition of Imposing Corporate Tax, etc.

XX Co., Ltd

Head of Central Tax Office

Seoul High Court Decision 2011Nu39228 Decided April 20, 2012

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

All of the records of this case and the judgment of the court below and the grounds of appeal were examined, but the argument on the grounds of appeal by the appellant falls under Article 4 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure of Appeal, and therefore, the appeal is dismissed under Article 5 of the same Act. It is so decided as

Reference materials.

If the grounds for final appeal are not included in the grounds of appeal that make it appropriate for the court of final appeal to become a legal trial, such as matters concerning significant violation of Acts and subordinate statutes, etc., the system of final appeal will not continue to proceed with the deliberation on the merits of the grounds for final appeal, but will not proceed with the deliberation on the merits of the grounds for final