Seoul High Court 2012Nu4694 (2012.09.06)

Cho High Court Decision 2010Du1544 (No. 24, 2011)

(C) The Plaintiff’s right to the instant land was objectively recognized at the time of settlement of the service cost.

(C) If the Plaintiff’s right to the land of this case is objectively recognized at the time of the above settlement agreement, it can be acknowledged that the Plaintiff’s right to the land of this case has already been objectively recognized at the time of the settlement agreement, and the time of reversion of the amount of land transfer is completed when the service is provided.

2012du22454 revocation of disposition of imposing corporate tax, etc.

XX Stock Company

Head of Seocho Tax Office

Seoul High Court Decision 2012Nu4694 Decided September 6, 2012

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

All of the records of this case and the judgment of the court below and the grounds of appeal were examined, but it is clear that the assertion on the grounds of appeal by the appellant falls under Article 4 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure for Appeal and therefore, the appeal is dismissed under Article 5 of the same Act. It is so decided as per

Reference materials.

If the grounds for final appeal are not included in the grounds of appeal that make it appropriate for the court of final appeal to become a legal trial, such as matters concerning significant violation of Acts and subordinate statutes, etc., the system of final appeal will not continue to proceed with the deliberation on the merits of the grounds for final appeal, but will not proceed with the deliberation on the merits of the grounds for final