Seoul High Court-2015-Nu-4358 ( December 18, 2015)

"Honorary money" defined as one of other incomes refers to money and valuables paid in the meaning of a case in connection with administrative affairs or provision of services.

"Honorary money," which is defined as one of other income, refers to money and valuables paid to the meaning of a case in connection with administrative affairs or provision of services, and whether it constitutes such money and valuables shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account the motive, purpose, relationship with the other party, amount, etc.

Article 21 of the Income Tax Act

2016du30637 Other details of global income and revocation of disposition

Park AA

O Head of tax office

Seoul High Court Decision 2015Nu44358 Decided December 18, 2015

May 24, 2016

All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).

Article 21(1)17 of the former Income Tax Act (amended by Act No. 9897, Dec. 31, 2009; hereinafter the same) refers to money and valuables provided as one of other income in relation to administrative affairs or provision of service, etc., and whether it constitutes such money and valuables ought to be determined by comprehensively considering the motive and purpose of receiving the relevant money and valuables, relationship with the other party, amount, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Du27288, Sept. 13, 2013).

In citing the judgment of the court of first instance, the court below held that the amount of this case in the judgment of the court of first instance was paid by the plaintiff, who is the representative director of BB of the company BB, to the purport that it constitutes "a honorarium under Article 21 (1) 17 of the former Income Tax Act" in the process of withdrawing a claim for damages in accordance with the agreement of this case, and rejected the plaintiff's assertion that the amount of this case is consolation money for mental suffering.

Examining the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance court cited by the court below in light of the records, including the evidence duly admitted, the above judgment of the court below is based on the legal principles as seen earlier. Contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, the court below did not err by abusing the right to command the lawsuit and infringing the Plaintiff’s right to pleading in violation of the principle of oral deliberation, excluding judgment on the honorarium subject to income tax in violation of the principle of no taxation without law, misunderstanding the probative value of the criminal judgment, or exceeding the bounds

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 on the bench.