logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2018.11.20 2017가단250140
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. In fact, the Plaintiff Company is a limited partnership with the purpose of taxi transport business.

The defendant is the general partner of the plaintiff company and the limited partner of the plaintiff company B who is appointed as a special representative of the plaintiff company.

The plaintiff company is a company with 50% shares of each of the 50% shares of the defendant and B.

(2) Since May 2017, the Seocheon Tax Office issued a tax disposition with respect to the Plaintiff Company as follows.

1. Grounds for taxation: The Plaintiff Company agreed to pay a fuel subsidy on the part of a fixed-term taxi engineer, although the amount of income subject to reporting is the total daily transportation revenue of taxi drivers.

A fixed-term taxi engineer shall deposit only the amount equivalent to the fuel subsidy out of the total daily taxi transport income with the Plaintiff company, excluding the amount equivalent to the fuel subsidy, while the Plaintiff company omitted the return of the income by recognizing only the amount of the Plaintiff company's input from the total transport income excluding the amount brought by the fixed-term taxi engineer as the fuel subsidy.

Accordingly, the Plaintiff Company omitted the total amount of KRW 507,892,849 from 2011 to 2015.

② Amount related to taxation: 45,365,404 won (total value-added tax and corporate tax from 2012 to 2015 + 41,395,292 + additional 3,970,112 won). (3) At present, the Plaintiff Company paid all the taxes according to the above taxation disposition.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 3-1 through 12, Eul evidence Nos. 7-1 and 2, and the result of each fact-finding with respect to the chief of Seocheon District Tax Office in this court

2. Both claims;

A. The defendant is obligated to manage the delegated affairs of the plaintiff company with the care of a good manager under Article 681 of the Civil Act and Article 681 of the Civil Act, which applies mutatis mutandis to a limited partnership company as a representative member, and the contents of the explicit or implied agreement, such as articles of incorporation, and furthermore, it

arrow