Suwon District Court-2017-Gu Partnership-65808 (2018.06)

Whether the Plaintiff constitutes a resident

The plaintiff shall be a resident when determining whether he/she has a family living together in the Republic of Korea, domestic occupation and income status, assets located in the Republic of Korea, domestic economy and legal relations, etc.

2018Nu5719 global income and revocation of disposition

AA Forest

BB Director of the Tax Office

Suwon District Court Decision 2017Guhap65808 Decided 11, 2018

November 21, 2018

December 05, 2018

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The judgment of the first instance is revoked. The Defendant’s imposition of global income tax of KRW 54,90,350 (including additional tax of KRW 17,446,162), global income tax of KRW 163,843,440 (including additional tax of KRW 58,613,449) in 2012, global income tax of KRW 1,889,301,00 (including additional tax of KRW 549,435,009) in November 5, 2014, and the imposition of penalty tax of KRW 149,752,40 (including additional tax of KRW 42,194,833) in 2013, shall be revoked.

1. Quotation, etc. of judgment in the first instance;

The reasoning of this court's judgment is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance except for the modification of the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance as follows 2. Thus, it is accepted in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Revised parts

○ 6 2 pages "............................. do not determine by taking into account the activities abroad and other living

○ From 6 up to 6 'the 3rd below 'the 3rd below's 'the 2nd below'.

000000000006.6 pages 7 of the following modifications:

“E, based on the evidence No. 34, evidence No. 13, etc., EE asserts that the actual lessee of the Ddong apartment, but the Plaintiff received the remainder payment of Ddong apartment, establishment of a right to lease on a deposit basis, and construction related to the occupancy of the apartment, from KimCC, and issued a daily order as to it. One bank under the name of E and the Korean bank account appears to have been used in accordance with the Plaintiff’s instructions (Evidence No. 13 and 16). The Plaintiff’s account in the name of E is deemed to have been transferred from the Plaintiff’s account to the IE bank account in the name of E, and KRW 52 million after being transferred from the Plaintiff’s account to the IE bank account in the name of E for the purpose of paying the down payment, and paid KRW 73 million as the down payment of Ddong apartment (Evidence No. 13-3-11 of evidence No. 13-3).”

○ 8 Up to 2 marks below the 8th table “ purchased” shall be amended as follows:

"The plaintiff alleged that the above apartment was owned by EF during the pertinent taxable period, but according to the evidence Nos. 10, 11, and 13, the plaintiff can find the fact that the plaintiff continued to purchase the above apartment through KimCC and paid any balance and acquisition tax, etc., and in light of this, EF seems to be merely the nominal owner."

○ 8. On the right side of the 7rd page below the

“Although the Plaintiff alleged to the effect that SeoG did not manage the Plaintiff or EE account, it is difficult to accept the said assertion in light of the entries in the evidence No. 13.

○ 8 below the 2rd below, " has been used and added to the right:

“Apparing the Chairperson from officers and employees of LL, and maintaining the power to make a final decision substantially.”

○ 9 3 acts, “.........” are amended as follows:

The main contents are as follows. On the other hand, the plaintiff resigned from the position of the representative director of the LLLL, but ordered non-libs to perform various duties, such as reservation of airline tickets, hotel and restaurant reservation, and departure of drivers.

○ 10 10 o.b. "on the right side":

The total number of days of stay in the Republic of Korea of MF, which was the wife of the Plaintiff, is more than 198 days (2011), 168 days (2012), and 286 days (2013), and the total number of days of stay in the Republic of Korea during the two consecutive years (2013), was more than 365 days, and the resident was also a resident. The number of days of stay in the Republic of Korea of MF, who is the Plaintiff born on September 201, constitutes 169 days (2012 years) and 290 days (2013 years), and also constitutes a resident.

00000000000000000000000

"It is difficult to see that the Plaintiff, whose executive officers and employees had been called the president and who had made a final decision, held the shares of the said corporations only for the purpose of investment, and the place where part of the business mail is sent cannot be viewed differently by ○○;

○ 10 10 o to the right side of the 10-side “points”:

“Although the Plaintiff cited the circumstances of donation to a foreign missionary organization, it is difficult to consider in determining whether the Plaintiff is a resident of the taxable period of the instant disposition, since the said donation activity was commenced from 2011 to 2013, which is a taxable period of the instant disposition, not from 2013. Therefore, it is difficult to deem that the Plaintiff engaged in the activities of the Korean Bar Association for money from 00 to 2013 and that the Plaintiff continued the activities of the Korean church through donation, etc. is particularly contradictory.”

○ 10 Up to 10 :00 up to 6 :00 on the 7th day below the 7th day, “it is difficult to reverse the above judgment.”

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim shall be dismissed as it is without merit. The judgment of the first instance court with the same conclusion is just, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit.