Seoul High Court-2018Nu62111 ( February 21, 2019)

The burden of proof of omission of cash sales and necessary expenses

(In the course of a specific lawsuit, the court below’s determination is just and dismissed, and it can be proved by either disclosing the fact that the amount deposited in the account of the taxpayer’s financial institution constitutes sales or revenue in accordance with the empirical rule, or revealing the indirect facts that can be inferred in light of the empirical rule.

Article 26 (Exemption from Supply of Goods or Services)

Supreme Court-2019-Du-37691 ( June 27, 2019)

Park Chang-si

Xhead of the tax office

The second instance decision

Seoul High Court-2018-Nu6211 ( February 21, 2019)

June 27, 2019

All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

The records of this case and the judgment of the court below and the grounds of appeal were examined, but the text on the grounds of appeal is examined.

The head of the agency shall not include the reasons prescribed in the subparagraphs of Article 4(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure for Appeal

B. Since it is recognized that there is no reason, the appeal is dismissed pursuant to Article 5 of the above Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.