Seoul High Court Decision 2011Nu473 ( August 24, 2011)

Seocho 2009west0106 (2009.04.09)

(C) Any disposition that is imposed as a bonus on the representative when it is deemed not clear that it is due to outflow outside the company.

(C) In light of the fact that there is no relationship between the lending and the lending and the lending and the lending and the lending and the lending and lending and the lending and lending and lending and lending and lending and lending and lending and lending and lending and lending and lending to the lending and lending and lending and lending and lending to the lending and lending and lending and lending and lending and lending and lending to the accounting books of the corporation, it is not recognized.

2011du23351 global income and revocation of disposition

Park XX

The Director of Gangnam District Office

Seoul High Court Decision 2011Nu473 Decided August 24, 2011

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

The appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 429 of the Civil Procedure Act, since the petition of appeal filed by the Plaintiff did not state any grounds for appeal and the appellate brief was not filed within the statutory period. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Reference materials.

If the grounds of final appeal are not included in the grounds of final 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 trial without continuing the deliberation on the merits of the grounds of final appeal, and refers to the system of dismissal of final appeal by judgment without continuing the deliberation on the merits of the grounds of final appeal (see this case, e.g.,