The lawsuit of this case is illegal as it is brought without going through legitimate procedure of the previous trial.

The facts that the instant disposition was served on the Plaintiff on November 18, 2014 are as seen earlier, and there is no evidence to prove that the Plaintiff filed a request for examination or a request for adjudication seeking revocation of the instant disposition within 90 days from the date of receipt of the service. Thus, the instant lawsuit is illegal as it was brought without going through lawful pre-trial procedures.

Article 76 of the Corporate Tax Act

2015Guhap20358 Revocation of Disposition of Corporate Tax Imposition

AA

○ Head of tax office

June 16, 2015

July 21, 2015

1. Rejection of the instant lawsuit

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

On November 4, 2014, the imposition of corporate tax (additional tax) accrued to the Plaintiff for the business year 2011 and the corporate tax (additional tax) accrued to the Plaintiff for the business year 2012 shall be revoked.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The plaintiff is a temple located on ○○○-ro ○○○-ro ○○○-ro ○○○○-ro ○○○-ro.

B. From September 16, 2014 to October 5, 2014, the Defendant confirmed that the Plaintiff issued a false donation receipt equivalent to KRW 625,457,890 to 226 workers in 201, and the Plaintiff issued a false donation receipt equivalent to KRW 678,101,00 to 244 workers in 2012, thereby allowing the said workers to evade the labor income tax of KRW 279,57,220 in total through year-end settlement. After that, the Defendant issued the Plaintiff on November 4, 2014; the Defendant issued the Plaintiff a false donation receipt equivalent to KRW 625,457,890 to 226 workers in 201; the Defendant issued a false donation receipt equivalent to KRW 678,101,00 to 244 workers in 201; the Defendant issued the Defendant’s disposition of KRW 15,201 (which was amended by Act No. 11607, Jan. 1, 2013).

2. Judgment on the main defense of this case

A. The defendant's assertion

As the Plaintiff did not file a request for examination or adjudication on the instant disposition under the Framework Act on National Taxes, the instant lawsuit is unlawful because it did not go through the administrative appeal procedure.

B. Relevant statutes

It is as shown in the attached Form.

C. Determination

1) An administrative litigation against an illegal tax disposition may not be filed without going through a request for evaluation or adjudgment under the Framework Act on National Taxes and a decision thereon (Articles 56(2), 61(1), and 68(1)2 of the Framework Act on National Taxes) within 90 days from the date when the Plaintiff becomes aware of the disposition (where a notice of disposition is received, the date of receipt thereof) (see Articles 56(2), 61(1), and 68(1)2 of the Framework Act on National Taxes). As seen earlier, the fact that the instant disposition was served on the Plaintiff on November 18, 2014, is as seen earlier, and there is no evidence to prove that the Plaintiff filed a request for evaluation or adjudgment seeking the cancellation of the instant disposition within 90 days from the

Therefore, since the lawsuit of this case is unlawful, it is decided to dismiss it. It is so decided as per Disposition.