Seocho 2013west 1225 ( November 19, 2013)

It appears that there is no other evidence, and interest income received is actually accrued.

As to the fact that the taxpayer is not the person to whom the interest income actually accrues, the taxpayer bears the burden of proof, but there is no evidence to acknowledge it, and such disposition is legitimate.

Article 16 (Interest Income)

2014Guhap52244 global income and revocation of such disposition

○ ○

○ Head of tax office

March 17, 2016

April 21, 2016

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. Litigation costs shall be borne by the Plaintiff

Cheong-gu Office

Defendant 20 x. 】. 】. 】 20 x (20 ○○○○, 20 x 20 x global income tax on global income that reverts to year 】 20 x 20 x all the dispositions of imposition of global income tax on global income that reverts to year are revoked.

1. Details of the disposition;

(a) The commissioner of a regional regional tax office of AAx. ¡¿ (20 ¡¿ (20) 】 (3) 】 (3) 】 (3) 】 】 】 (3) 】 】 】 (4) 】 】 】 (3) 】 x 20 】 】 (4) x 10 x 10 x 20 x x 20 x x 20 x 20 x x 20 x 10 ) ; and (4) x 20 x 30 x 20 x 20 x 20 x 20 x 20 x 10 x 20 x 20 x 20 , respectively (hereinafter referred to as “instant disposition”).

B. The Plaintiff is dissatisfied with the disposition of this case x 20 x. 】. Although the Tax Tribunal has filed an appeal for adjudication with the Tax Tribunal, the Tax Tribunal x 20 x x x. 】. The Plaintiff’s appeal was dismissed.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The plaintiff x 20 x 20 x. 】. 】 ○○○○○○○○ from among the ○○○○○○○ source lent to BB, is the funds of CCC, and in addition x 20 x. 】. 】 ○○○○○○ source lent to BB x x 20 x x x. x. x. 】 】 】 ○○○○○ source lent to BB x x 20 x x x 20 x. 】. 】 】 】 ○○○○○ source lent to BB x x x x 20 x. 】. 】 】 ○○○○○○ source and 20 x. 】 】 】 】 (i) lent to B B , thus, the disposition of interest income accrued to the plaintiff is unlawful.

(b) Fact of recognition;

1) The Plaintiff 20 ¡¿ (20) ¡¿ (3) 】. In ○○ court’s ○○ branch, the Plaintiff was sentenced to the crime of occupational embezzlement, a crime of registration of credit business under the former Credit Business Act and a crime of violation of the Protection of Financial Users Act, imprisonment with prison labor for ○○○○○○○○○ branch, which was the appellate court 】 】 20 ¡¿ (3) 】 (3) 】 (30) 】 (20) 】 (3) 】 (4) 】 (3) 】 (4) 】 (4) 】 (3) 】 (4) 】 (4)

1. Violation of the former Registration of Credit Business and Protection of Financial Users Act, and violation of the Registration of Credit Business, etc. and Protection of Financial Users Act;

(a) The point of unregistered credit business;

Any person who intends to engage in credit business or loan brokerage business shall register with the Special Metropolitan City Mayor, Metropolitan City Mayor, Do Governor, or Special Self-Governing Province Governor who has jurisdiction over

Nevertheless, the Defendant, without registering a credit business, etc. to the competent authority, conspired with HH, which is an employee of the Defendant, who is an employee of the Defendant without registering a credit business, etc., x 20 x. x. x. x. Around Seoul, the Defendant loaned ○○○○○○○ (excluding line interest and ○○○○○) to BB in Seoul, etc. x 20 x x. x. x. By the end, the Defendant, as indicated in the list of crimes (1) below, in collusion with HH or GG, EE, and FF, operated a credit business by lending the total amount of ○○○○○○○○○○ to the obligor on a total sum of ○○○○○ occasions.

B. Violation of the interest rate limitation

Where a credit service provider lends a loan to an individual or a small corporation, it shall not exceed 66% per annum from October 28, 2002 to October 3, 2007, and shall not exceed 49% per annum from October 4, 2007 to July 20, 2010, and shall not exceed 44% per annum from July 21, 2010, and the unregistered credit service provider shall not be entitled to interest exceeding 30% per annum from January 21, 2009.

Nevertheless, the Defendant conspired with the above HH x 20 x. 】. 】. In light of the background, the Defendant loaned the ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○, which was agreed to receive monthly interest rate for three months, and 20 x (20 x. x. x. x. x. x. x. x (20 x.) x. x (a) received the interest exceeding the limited interest rate after obtaining the total of 00 ○○○○○○○ throughout the period of interest.

The Defendant along with this 20 x 20 x. x. x. x. x. x. x by the time the Defendant alone or in collusion with the above HH, GG, EE, and FF, as indicated in the annexed crime sight table (2) (Omission) (i.e., the amount excluding the recipient of 00 out of the interest on the following crime sight table) received interest on the total ○○○○○○ (the amount excluding the recipient of 00 out of the interest on the following crime sight table) in excess of the limited interest rate.

2) During the period of the integrated investigation of personal taxes against the Plaintiff, a public official belonging to a AAA regional tax office investigated the financial accounts of the Plaintiff and related persons (including HH, Plaintiff’s Ha, EE, FF, GG et al., an employee of the Plaintiff’s J, KK et al. established and operated by the Plaintiff, who was in charge of financial transactions upon the Plaintiff’s instructions. Of the ○○○ case deposited as a check out of a large amount of more than KRW 100 million deposited by the Plaintiff, the public official confirmed that the BB borrowed funds from the Plaintiff was deposited into the account of the Plaintiff and HH as indicated below.

3) AA public official belonging to a regional tax office x 20 x (20 x.. x. x 20 x. x. 】. 】 The Plaintiff requested the Plaintiff, etc. to vindicate the details of the transactions from entry twice, but the Plaintiff failed to submit particular explanatory materials within the investigation period.

4) AA official affiliated with a regional tax office ascertains when and when the Plaintiff actually received interest on the loan, and adjusts interest income by year as described in the above 1. A(a) (see subparagraph 2).

5) The Plaintiff 20 x 20 x. 】. 】. The Plaintiff was present in the investigation of a regional tax office 】 】 (a) stated that the name of HH, GG, FF, EE, etc. at the time of conducting monetary transactions with BB, and that there was a deficit in trading with the financial account lending.

6) The investigation report prepared at the ○○ Public Prosecutor’s Office’s ○○○○○○ Office (a document attached to the details received under the name of a suspect H, FF, EE, or GG from a suspect M) states that H was paid ○○○○○○○○○○○○○ in the period of 20 x (20 x (0 x (20 x (30) x (20 x (20 x (20) x (20 x (20 x (3) x (20 x (20 x (20 x (3)) x (20 x (20 x (3) x (20 x (20 x (20 x (3) x (20 x (3) x (1) x (3) x (1) x (1) x (3) x (1) x (200.

C. Determination

1) Relevant legal principles

The burden of proving the existence of a taxation requirement fact is against the tax authority, but if it is revealed that a taxation requirement fact has been presumed in light of the empirical rule in the specific litigation process, unless the other party proves that the pertinent fact was not eligible for the application of the empirical rule, it cannot be readily concluded that the pertinent taxation disposition was an unlawful disposition that did not meet the taxation requirement (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 89Nu6006, Apr. 27, 1990; 2009Du6568, Sept. 24, 2009).

In addition, in a civil trial, even though it is not bound by the fact-finding in the criminal trial, the facts that have been recognized as the crime of reason for the criminal judgment which became final and conclusive on the same factual basis are valuable evidence. Thus, barring any special circumstance where it is deemed difficult to adopt the judgment of facts in the criminal trial in light of other evidence submitted in the civil trial, the facts opposed thereto cannot be recognized (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 97Da24276, Sept. 30, 1997; 2007Da69148, Feb. 14, 2008). Such legal principles are equally applicable to the administrative judgment to which the provisions of the Civil Procedure Act apply mutatis mutandis.

2) Whether interest income substantially reverts to the Plaintiff

The fact that the plaintiff 20 x 20 x 20 x. x. x 20 x x. x x. x. x x ○○○○○○○○, etc. that the fact that the plaintiff borrowed the ○○○○, etc. to B, was recognized by the above final judgment, and that the fact that the ○○○○, etc. was received was recognized by

The defendant conducted an investigation based on the facts recognized in the above final and conclusive judgment, and calculated the interest income accrued to the plaintiff 】 20 】 from the year 】 20 】 the year 】 the annual interest income accrued to the plaintiff, and then used it

On the other hand, it is reasonable to prove that the Plaintiff is not the actual owner of the interest income, since it is interpreted in accordance with the empirical rule to view that the Plaintiff’s lending of money and the interest income received through the Plaintiff’s account or the related person’s account actually reverts to the Plaintiff.

However, the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone does not prove that the actual owner of the interest income is not the Plaintiff.

Specifically, the Plaintiff asserts to the effect that the initial loan principal ○○○○○○○ is funds of the CCC, and interest income therefrom belongs to the CCC, and accordingly, submitted Gap’s certificate (loan, futures option investment contract), Gap’s certificate, Gap’s ○, Gap’s ○ ○, Gap’s ○ ○ ○, Gap’s ○ ○ ○, (e.g., performance note and certificate of personal seal impression), Gap’s ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○, Gap’s ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○, and the certificate of personal seal impression), but the above evidence alone is insufficient to acknowledge the Plaintiff’s assertion (the Gap ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○.

In addition, the plaintiff 20 x 20 x. 】 】. 】 (.) The plaintiff alleged that the ○○○○○○○ Won lent to BB was the funds of GG, but it is difficult to believe the witness's testimony that seems consistent with the plaintiff's argument in light of the relation between the plaintiff and the GG, etc., as it is, in light of the relation between the plaintiff and the GG, it is insufficient to recognize the plaintiff's assertion by itself, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Rather, there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Rather, the plaintiff did not submit objective materials that the principal and interest of the loan of the KRW 20 x x 20 x x x x x x x x . (According to the statement in the request for a trial) x it seems that the relevant principal and interest were not recovered, and there is sufficient reason to deem that the plaintiff lent the name of GGG and financial transaction.

The plaintiff asserts to the effect that the interest income does not belong to the plaintiff as the creditor is separate from loans of ○○, ○ through ○○, ○○, ○○○, and ○○ in the crime list (1) attached to the remaining criminal judgment. However, there is no evidence supporting this part of the plaintiff's assertion.

Therefore, it cannot be deemed that there was any error in the disposition of this case that the interest income received by the Plaintiff was substantially reverted to the Plaintiff. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s assertion is rejected.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.