1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The reasons why the court should explain in this decision are as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of the judgment of the plaintiff's assertion as stated in Paragraph 2 below, and therefore, it shall accept it in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Additional determination

A. The purport of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the instant provision was introduced in consideration of the characteristics of institutional investors, regardless of whether a financial holding company is a subsidiary. As such, if a dividend corporation is an institutional investor, the corporation should be recognized to exclude the financial holding company from gross income, as in cases where the subsidiary

This can clearly confirm the legislative intent through the interpretation of the Ministry of Strategy and Finance, which is the competent authority in the amendment process of the Corporate Tax Act.

B. In full view of the provisions of the relevant corporate tax laws and regulations applicable to the disposition of this case, such as ① Articles 18-3(1)4 and 18-2(1)4 of the Corporate Tax Act, and Article 17-2(6) of the Enforcement Decree of the Corporate Tax Act, the income dividends system for the adjustment of double taxation on the dividend income of the general domestic corporation like the Plaintiff is separate from Article 18-3 of the Corporate Tax Act, and the income dividends system for the adjustment of double taxation on the dividend income of a holding company is separate from Article 18-2 of the Corporate Tax Act, ② the proviso of Article 18-2(1)4 of the Corporate Tax Act, b).

The title provides for the "subsidiary" under the Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act or the Financial Holding Companies Act. In full view of the language and text of the relevant provisions under the corporate tax law, its legislative intent, and the various circumstances cited earlier than the principle of strict interpretation of the tax law, where a dividend corporation is an institutional investor.