Busan High Court-2015-Nu20831 ( October 19, 2015)

disposition which is imposed on a corporation by deeming that the ship of this case is transferred at a low price to a person with a special relationship

In full view of the fact that the sale and purchase of the instant vessel between the Plaintiff and its specially related parties does not appear in the process of autopsy, takeover, etc. and it is difficult to view the instant vessel as a normal transaction, the Plaintiff did not err in the imposition of corporate tax by deeming that the instant vessel

Article 52 of the Corporate Tax Act

2015du47533 Revocation of Disposition of Imposing corporate tax, etc.

AA

○ Head of tax office

Busan High Court Decision 2015Nu20831 Decided June 19, 2015

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

Article 88(1)3 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Corporate Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 22035, Feb. 18, 2010) provides that a corporation subject to the rejection of unfair act and calculation under Article 52(1) of the former Corporate Tax Act (amended by Act No. 10423, Dec. 30, 2010) transfers an asset at a price lower than the market price to a person with a special relationship, such as a stockholder, etc.

The court below found on July 1, 2009 that the plaintiff is a corporation operating the inland passenger transport business, etc. (hereinafter referred to as "ship of this case"), that the plaintiff agreed to sell 0 billion won to BB, the largest shareholder of the passenger ship of this case (hereinafter referred to as "the ship of this case") on July 1, 2009, and that the registration of transfer of the name BB on August 6, 2009 with respect to the ship of this case was completed on August 4, 2009, BB agreed to sell the ship of this case at 0 billion won to CCC Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "CC") on August 4, 200 (hereinafter referred to as "2.0 billion won"), 3 billion won in total, 200 billion won in total, 200 billion won in total, 200 billion won in total, and 3 billion won in total, 200 billion won in total to the plaintiff.

Then, the lower court determined that the instant disposition was lawful on the premise that the Plaintiff’s secondary sale price of the instant vessel was recognized as the market price of the instant vessel, based on the premise that the instant vessel reflects the objective exchange value at the time of the instant vessel, based on the premise that the KRW 0 billion, which is the selling price of the instant secondary sale price, is recognized as the market price of the instant vessel, at the same time as that of the instant vessel, between BB and CCC, other than

Examining the reasoning of the judgment below in light of the above statutory provisions, relevant legal principles and records, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is no error of law such as violation of the rules of evidence and misapprehension of legal principles as to the market price in the unfair act and calculation denial rules

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.