Seoul Administrative Court 2016Guhap50297 ( October 12, 2016)

Even if re-audit was originally corrected as at the time of re-audit, it does not go against the binding force of the decision of the trial, and the omission of sales shall be determined

In accordance with the re-audit decision of the Tax Tribunal, the initial investigation is not contrary to the binding force of the decision of the tax Tribunal, and the fact that the person is not an individual is converted into a corporation in accordance with the rule of experience, the time of sale of inventory assets, and continuous purchase of non-data.

Article 66 (Determination and Correction)

2016Nu47910 Revocation of Disposition of Imposing corporate tax, etc.

○○○○ Corporation

Head of Guro Tax Office

Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2016Guhap50297 decided December 12, 2016

October 26, 2016

November 16, 2016

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The judgment of the first instance court shall be revoked. On March 3, 2014, the imposition of value-added tax on the Plaintiff at 2008: (a) the Defendant’s imposition of value-added tax on the 2008 business year; (b) the corporate tax on the 2009 business year; (c) the corporate tax on the 2010 business year; (d) the corporate tax on the 2011 business year; and (e) the corporate tax on the 2012 business year; and (e) the Defendant’s imposition of value-added tax on the 201 business year on March 3, 2014. The imposition of value-added tax on the 2010 business year on the 2010 business year; (e) the amount of income on the 2010 business year on the 2010 business year; (e) the amount of value-added tax on the 2010 business year on the 2010 business year; and (e) the value-added tax on the 2010 year on the 2010 year.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasoning of this court's judgment is as follows, except that the pertinent matter in the judgment of the court of first instance is dismissed as follows. Thus, it is cited in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

○ 4th page 12 "data additionally submitted by the Plaintiff" is "data originally submitted or additionally submitted by the Plaintiff, the source of money deposited in the instant account, and the flow of funds."

From the 6th 6th 6th 7th 'after', "the sales amount of this case is the part that began to be deposited and managed after about 3 years from the time ○○○ opened a retail business."

2. Conclusion

The judgment of the first instance is justifiable. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.