logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2020.01.10 2018나30780
구상금
Text

1. All appeals by the defendant against the plaintiffs are dismissed.

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

purport, purport, and.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court citing the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the following determination as to the assertion added or emphasized by the defendant in this court. Thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article

2. On March 17, 2014, the Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff offsets the Plaintiff’s claim for reimbursement of KRW 150,000,000 against the loan claim of KRW 150,000 against the Plaintiff’s claim for reimbursement. The Defendant submitted the result of the inquiry into the tax accounting corporation HI with respect to the above loan claim as additional evidence.

As a result of the fact-finding, the tax accountant I omitted 150,000,000 won from the Defendant’s loans to Plaintiff A at the time of the return of corporate tax in 2014 and corrected the accounting by adding it to the tax office in 2018 and reported the corporate tax to the tax office.

However, the following circumstances acknowledged by Gap evidence 1, 8, 9, and evidence 13-1 and 2 of Gap evidence 13-2 are stated in the standard balance sheet among the tax settlement statement submitted by the defendant to the tax office for the report of corporate tax in 2014, namely, the short-term loan items of the standard balance sheet are stated in KRW 620,95,037, and the above short-term loan details are not stated in KRW 150,000,000. After March 8, 2017, the defendant filed the lawsuit in this case with the plaintiff, the loan claims of KRW 150,000,000 against the plaintiff were omitted in the process of filing the tax return, and the defendant's auditor was corrected in the process of filing the tax return for corporate tax in 2018, and the defendant's audit and inspection of KRW 150,000,000 for the plaintiff's husband D and KRW 10,000,00 for the plaintiff's "Y 10."

arrow