Seoul Administrative Court-2018-Gu 50291 ( November 23, 2018)

Cho Jae-2017-west-3709 ( October 18, 2017)

It is reasonable to see that it is difficult to see that money has been continuously and repeatedly lent for profit-making purposes and that it is a non-business profit.

It is reasonable to view it as a non-business profit because it is difficult to view it as a loan to an unspecified person because the period or frequency of lending is very limited and the advertisement of credit business through the leaflet, etc. is likely to have not been conducted, and it is difficult to view it as a loan to an unspecified person.

Article 16 of the Income Tax Act

2018Nu78567 Gross income and revocation of disposition

○ ○

○ Head of tax office

Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2018Guhap50291 Decided November 23, 2018

April 26, 2019

June 7, 2019

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked. The global income tax for the year 2015 owed by the Defendant to the Plaintiff on May 0, 2017

The imposition of KRW 000 (including additional duties) shall be revoked.

1. Quotation of the reasons for the judgment of the first instance;

This decision is based on Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, since the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance except for the dismissal of the following contents:

○ 2 pages 8, the "Procedures for the auction of real estate" is the "Procedures for the compulsory auction of real estate".

○ 2, the 15th page "00 won" is regarded as "00 won," and hereinafter as "income amount of this case."

The "Income Tax Act" of the 3th 15th 15th 7th 2th 2th 7th 2018 is the "former Income Tax Act (Amended by Act No. 16104, Dec. 31, 2018)".

○ 3 pages 21 include “the description of Category A 0 or 00” as “each description of Category A 0 or 00 (including a number; hereinafter the same shall apply)”.

2. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.