early trial 2014west3106 ( October 24, 2015)

The propriety of the disposition taken in the calculation of the interest difference according to the difference in the appropriation order of the guaranteed debt, deeming the interest difference as first collected compared to the principal;

Since the total amount of a surety obligation can be specified separately from the principal and interest in accordance with a credit guarantee agreement and a credit guarantee agreement, it cannot be deemed that it satisfies the requirements for application of the order of appropriation for payment of obligation, and it is reasonable to deem that there was an agreement on the scope of principal and interest in a case where a credit guarantee agency is responsible for a guarantee through a

Article 479 of the Civil Act: Calculation of interest income amount subject to withholding tax under Article 56 of the Enforcement Rule of the Corporate Tax Act in the order of appropriation of appropriation to the principal

2015Guhap74395 Revocation of Disposition of Imposition of Corporate Tax, etc.

○ Bank Co., Ltd. and 1

○ Head of tax office

August 11, 2016

September 1, 2016

1. 피고가 2014. 11. 7. 원고 주식회사 〇〇은행에 대하여 한 별지 1 목록 ①항 기재 세목의 ②항 기재 과세기간에 대한 ③항 기재 세액(가산세 포함)의 부과처분 중 ④항 기재 세액을 초과하는 부분, 원고 주식회사 〇〇금융지주에 대하여 한 별지 2 목록 ①항 기재 세목의 ②항 기재 과세기간에 대한 ③항 기재 세액(가산세 포함)의 부과처분 중 ④항 기재 세액을 초과하는 부분을 각 취소한다.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

Cheong-gu Office

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. Status of the plaintiffs

원고 주식회사 〇〇금융지주(이하 '원고 금융지주회사'라 한다)는 구 금융지주회사법(2013. 8. 13. 법률 제12099호로 개정되기 전의 것) 제2조 제1항에 따른 금융지주회사로서, 원고 주식회사 〇〇은행(이하 '원고 은행'이라 한다)의 지분 100%를 보유하고 있으며, 원고들은 법인세법상 연결납세방식을 적용하여 2010 사업연도부터는 원고 금융지주회사가 연결 법인세를 신고・납부하고 있다.

B. Regarding subrogation

1) 원고 은행은 신용보증기금, 〇〇신용보증기금, 각종 신용보증재단 등(이하 이를 합하여 '신용보증기관'이라 한다)이 발급한 신용보증서를 담보로 은행여신거래기본약관에 따라 원고 은행의 고객인 채무자에게 여신을 제공하고 있는데, 채무자의 부도・연체 등 신용보증부실사유가 발생하면, 이를 신용보증기관에 통지하고 보증채무의 이행을 청구한다. 이러한 경우 신용보증기관은 위 청구의 당부를 심사하고 그 결과를 원고 은행에 통지하게 되는데, 위 통지를 받으면 원고 은행은 신용보증기관에 대위변제증서 등의 서류를 제공하고 채권의 원금과 이자를 수령한다.

2) The Defendant: (a) determined that there was an omission of interest income that could have been additionally incurred if the accounts were disposed of as a result of the first collection of principal without any agreement by the Plaintiffs regarding the order of appropriation; (b) included approximately KRW 5,645,00,000 in interest income in the business year 2009; (c) approximately 2,725,000,000 in approximately 2,314,000,000 in the business year 2011; (d) approximately 1,581,00,000,000 in the business year 2012; and (e) approximately 2,016,000,000,000,000 in total amount were collected first; and (e) included KRW 2,00,000,000 in the corporate tax for the business year 2013; and (e) included the list of additional tax for each business year 2015,7081,7,2015,7,70140.

In addition, the Defendant, on November 7, 2014, deemed that the education tax base was increased due to the increase in the revenue amount of the Plaintiff Bank, corrected and notified the Plaintiff Bank of the amount of the education tax as stated in the column of the “education Tax” in the attached Table 1 list. (2) For each taxable period listed in the attached Table 1, the Defendant corrected and notified the same amount of the education tax (including the additional tax) as described in paragraph (3) (hereinafter “the first disposition”).

C. Concerning commercial papers

1) The Defendant issued a discount of approximately KRW 4.4 billion (hereinafter “the instant discount amount”) among the corporate bills paid by the Plaintiff bank in 2011 through 2013 (hereinafter “the instant corporate bills”), but determined that the Plaintiff bank did not withhold tax on the discount amount at the time of paying the instant corporate bills.

2) Accordingly, on November 7, 2014, on the ground that the Plaintiff bank did not withhold the instant discount amount, the Defendant imposed the Plaintiff bank KRW 303,401,110 of the additional tax on failure to withhold taxes for the business year 2011, KRW 265,468,430 of the additional tax on failure to withhold withholding taxes for the business year 2012, and KRW 52,721,810 of the additional tax on failure to withhold withholding taxes for the business year 2013, and the Plaintiff financial holding company imposed the Plaintiff bank’s additional tax on KRW 9,821,06 of the additional tax on failure to withhold withholding taxes for the business year 2011, KRW 9,61,389, KRW 75,316,875 of the additional tax on failure to withhold withholding taxes for the business year 2012 (hereinafter collectively referred to as “each of the instant dispositions” and “each of the instant dispositions” were added to the Plaintiffs.

(d) Procedure of the previous trial;

On February 5, 2015, the Plaintiffs were dissatisfied with each of the instant dispositions and filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal, but was dismissed on June 24, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1-25, Gap evidence 2-1, 2-2, and Gap evidence 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether each of the dispositions of this case is legitimate

A. The plaintiffs' assertion

1) As to the first disposition of this case

In common, the credit guarantee terms and conditions applicable to this case include ① the balance of the guaranteed loan multiplied by the guarantee ratio, and ② the principal whose amount does not exceed the guaranteed amount and ② the amount of accrued interest in accordance with the agreed interest rate up to the date of the performance of the guaranteed obligation as the guaranteed obligation. According to the above terms and conditions provisions, the credit guarantee agency guarantees the principal and the interest obligation among all the entire obligations, and set a certain amount within the limit, so there is no room for concern about the order of performance appropriation of obligation as the nature of the repayment is specified from the beginning.

Even if the provision of the above terms and conditions cannot be interpreted as guaranteeing the principal and interest obligations separately, there was an express or implied agreement between the Plaintiffs and credit guarantee agencies regarding the order of appropriation of the principal and interest obligations to pay a certain amount for each principal and interest obligations. Therefore, the first disposition of this case, based on the premise that the said amount of the guaranteed obligation should be appropriated in the order of interest and principal among the obligations, is unlawful.

2) As to the second disposition of this case

Pursuant to Article 73(4) of the former Corporate Tax Act (amended by Act No. 11607, Jan. 1, 2013; hereinafter referred to as the "former Corporate Tax Act"), "person who represents or is entrusted with the withholding agent" means a person who is authorized or entrusted with the business of collecting corporate taxes from a person liable to pay the amount of income referred to in each subparagraph of paragraph (1) of the same Article and the business of paying the withheld corporate taxes to the competent tax office. Such delegation of withholding business may be made explicitly and implicitly, but in order to have an implied delegation, there is need to be circumstances to presume the intention of delegation to the extent that it is identical to the case of explicit delegation.

However, in the case of this case, the Plaintiff bank opened the current account with the issuer of the commercial papers, and agreed to withdraw the face value of the relevant commercial papers from the current account when the payment is made after the maturity date of the commercial papers issued by the issuer. (No. 5) The Plaintiff bank is merely merely entrusted with the payment of the face value of the relevant commercial papers, and the Plaintiff bank is merely merely entrusted with the payment of the face value of the commercial papers, and there was no fact that it was in charge of the business of collecting the withholding tax on the discounted value of the commercial papers itself or the business of issuing the discounted value of the commercial papers which is the cause of income subject to withholding

In addition, from the standpoint of the Plaintiff bank, it is impossible for the Plaintiff bank to expect the Plaintiff bank to perform the withholding duty on the amount of the amount of the amount of the amount of the amount of the amount of the amount of the amount of the amount of the amount of the amount of the bill, on the premise that the Plaintiff bank falls under the “person who has issued the bill at a discounted rate,” “person who has presented the bill,” “person who has purchased the bill at a discount,” “person who has purchased the bill at a discount,” “the person who has received the bill, or who has received the delegation,” or “the person who has received the bill, on behalf of the person who has presented it.”

B. Relevant statutes

Attached Form 3 shall be as listed in attached Table 3.

(c) Fact of recognition;

1) As to the appropriation of performance

A) Conclusion of credit transaction agreements

The plaintiff bank shall prepare a credit transaction agreement in case of lending money to the customer (the principal debtor), and the agreement shall contain that the principal and the calculation method of interest rates of the lending principal and the basic terms and conditions of banking loan transactions shall apply.

(b)the receipt of a credit guarantee certificate;

The Plaintiff bank shall receive a credit guarantee certificate issued by a credit guarantee agency from the customers in order to secure the collection of principal and interest of the loan. The credit guarantee certificate contains the estimated amount of loan and the rate of guarantee. The main contents of the terms and conditions of the credit guarantee agency applicable to the above credit guarantee (hereinafter referred to as the “credit guarantee terms

Credit Guarantee Fund shall be the Credit Guarantee Fund.

Article 18 (Extent of Performance of Guaranteed Obligations)

(1) The Credit Guarantee Fund shall discharge as guarantee obligations the sum of the following amounts:

1. The principal which does not exceed the amount guaranteed by multiplying the balance of the guaranteed loan by the rate of guarantee: Provided, That where the substitute payment of payment guarantee occurs, the substitute payment within the scope of the guaranteed amount by multiplying the amount of guarantee;

2. The accrued interest on the amount discharged under subparagraph 1 based on the agreed interest rate (excluding the overdue interest rate applied on the date of payment of interest) up to the date of performing the guaranteed liability: Provided, That with respect to the substitute payment under the proviso to subparagraph 1, the accrued interest at the interest rate calculated by adding 2% to the yield of 91-day negotiable certificates of deposit issued by the Korea Financial Investment Association (based on closing price on the date

3. The amount prescribed by the Acts and subordinate statutes of the Credit Guarantee Fund out of the expenses paid by the creditor to recover the debt.

The Technology Credit Guarantee Fund;

Article 14 (Extent of Performance of Guaranteed Obligations)

(1) The Korea Technology Finance Corporation shall discharge the aggregate of the following amounts as guaranteed liabilities:

1. Smaller amount of the share of liabilities of the Korea Technology Credit Guarantee Fund and the balance of guarantees, out of the amount of an application accompanied by a recovery guarantee under Article 10, after preferential appropriation: Provided, That where substitute payments for a payment guarantee have occurred, the lesser amount of the share of liabilities of the Korea Technology Credit Guarantee Fund and the balance of guarantee;

2. An accrued interest at an interest rate applicable (excluding deferred interest rates) to the amount discharged under subparagraph 1, if the fulfillment period for non-loans has not yet arrived by the date prior to the performance of the guaranteed obligation: Provided, That with respect to the substitute payment under the proviso to subparagraph 1, the accrued interest at an interest rate calculated by adding 2% to the rate of return on distribution of 91-day negotiable certificates of deposit publicly announced by the Korea Securities Dealers Association (based

3. The amount obtained by multiplying the amount determined by the Acts and subordinate statutes of the Korea Technology Finance Corporation by the guarantee ratio among the expenses paid by a creditor to recover a guarantee side loan (excluding the excess enforcement portion);

The Credit Guarantee Foundation.

Article 16 (Extent of Performance of Guaranteed Obligations)

(1) The Foundation shall discharge guaranteed obligations in the sum of the following amounts:

1. The lesser of the share of liability of a foundation and the balance of guarantee in the unclaimed incidental application money which has been appropriated preferentially for the recovery money prescribed in Article 13: Provided, That where substitute payments for a payment guarantee have occurred, the lesser of the share of liability of a foundation and the balance of guarantee in the unclaimed substitute payments;

2. Interest which is accrued to the amount discharged under subparagraph 1 based on the agreed interest rate (excluding overdue interest rates which are applied on the date of payment of interest) from the date prior to the performance of the guaranteed obligation: Provided, That with respect to the substitute payment under the proviso to subparagraph 1, the interest which is accrued at the interest rate calculated by adding 2% to the yield of 91-day negotiable certificates of deposit as publicly announced by the Korea Securities Dealers Association

3. An amount calculated by multiplying the amount prescribed by the Decree of the Regional Credit Guarantee Foundation by the guarantee ratio, out of the expenses paid by the creditor for recovery of claims for guarantee side loans (excluding excess enforcement sections);

C) Claim for discharge of guaranteed liability

If the principal obligor is unable to repay his obligation, the Plaintiff bank claims the performance of the guaranteed obligation to a credit guarantee agency in accordance with the form set by the credit guarantee agency, and the amount of principal and interest calculated according to the credit guarantee terms and conditions is clearly divided.

D) Delivery of certificate of subrogation, etc.

When a credit guarantee agency receives the performance of a guaranteed obligation, the Plaintiff bank shall deliver documents such as a certificate of subrogation to the credit guarantee agency, and the amount of principal and interest repaid is divided into the above documents.

E) Notice to the principal debtor

After that, the plaintiff bank shall notify the principal debtor of the receipt of the subrogation payment from a credit guarantee institution due to arrears, and shall notify the principal debtor of the balance separately from the amount of the principal and interest.

(f) Accounting;

A bank shall account the balance notified to the principal debtor in installments of the principal and interest.

2) With respect to withholding obligations:

A) The Plaintiff bank opened a current account between the CP issuer and the CP issuer, and agreed to withdraw the face value of the relevant CP from the current account when the payment is made after the maturity of the CP issued by the said company. The major contents of the terms and conditions of the deposit agreement in which the deposit and withdrawal between the Plaintiff bank and the CP issuer are free are as follows.

Terms and Conditions of Deposit with Free Deposit Deposit Money

Article 1 Scope of Application

(1) A deposit in which deposit and withdrawal are free (hereinafter referred to as "deposit") means a deposit which is freely deposited and withdrawn without fixing a deposit period.

(2) The provisions of the basic terms and conditions of deposit transactions shall apply to matters not specified in this contract.

§ 3. Registration of banking instruments, forms for bills, and particulars of issuance of bills

(1) A customer shall trade in the form of a check or bill, which has been granted by a bank, and where a bill has been issued in excess of ten million won, the customer shall register the details of issuance (the date of issuance, the date of payment, the issue amount, etc.) on the network related to the issuance of a bill at the

(2) The paper referred to in paragraph (1) shall be provided by the bank when the customer makes a request: Provided, That if it is deemed that there are many amount requested by the customer, it may be limited to such amount as deemed necessary.

Article 5. Payment of Check, Promissory Notes, and Revocation of Entrustment of Payment

(1) A bank shall pay to the presenter the amount specified on a check or note granted pursuant to Article 3 (1) through (3) upon entrustment by a customer.

(2) A bank shall pay a check or bill only when it is presented within the presentment period for payment: Provided, That a check may be paid even after the expiration of the presentment period for payment.

(3) In cancelling a mandate for payment of a check or bill which has already been issued by a customer, he/she shall file an application in the form prepared by the bank, and deposit the amount entered in the check or bill in accordance with the clearing Business Regulations as security.

§ 11. Termination of current accounts or household current accounts contract

(2) A bank shall register the information on overdue payments, subrogated payment, information on vicarious payment, information on finance which is related to such information, and public records, among the credit transaction information under the Credit Information Management Rules, and shall terminate the deposit when it falls under the current account determined by the bank, the reasons for termination of the contract on household current account, and notify the fact to the customer.

B) The process in which the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the company for the establishment of a current account with respect to corporate bills and actually pays the amount of bills is generally as follows.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry in Gap evidence Nos. 5, 7 through 11 (including each number in the case of provisional number), the purport of the whole pleadings

D. Determination

1) As to the first disposition of this case

A) Whether the provisions governing the application of appropriation for performance apply

Article 56 of the Enforcement Rule of the Corporate Tax Act, which is the basis of the first disposition, provides that in calculating the interest income amount subject to withholding, in the event that only a part of the amount corresponding to the loan and the interest on the loan has been repaid without any special agreement on the repayment of the loan and the interest thereon, the payment of the interest shall be deemed to have been made first. Article 479(1) of the Civil Act provides that “If an obligor pays the expenses and the interest on one or several obligations, if the obligor pays the entire amount of the loan and the interest, the payment shall be made in the order of the expenses, the interest and the principal.

In order to apply the order of appropriation for performance (interest ? principal) under each of the above provisions, ‘the person who has performed the obligation must pay only the amount corresponding to the part of principal and interest.' In full view of the following circumstances, which can be acknowledged by adding the above facts of recognition and the entire purport of the arguments, it is difficult to deem that the case satisfies the requirements for the application of the above provisions on appropriation for performance.

(1) A credit guarantee certificate issued by a plaintiff bank from the primary debtor shall contain the estimated amount of loan and guarantee ratio, and may specify the total amount of guarantee liabilities to be borne by a credit guarantee agency, in cases where the loan ratio and the balance of loan are replaced by the formula prescribed in the credit guarantee terms and conditions, by classifying it

② The Plaintiff bank filed a claim with a credit guarantee agency for the full amount of the specified principal and interest, and the credit guarantee agency also paid the full amount of the claim to the Plaintiff bank.

(3) The purpose of the Enforcement Rule of the Corporate Tax Act and the Civil Act regarding the order of appropriation of claims is that, in a case where a person who pays a debt pays a debt less than all principal and interest, there is concern that conflict between the person liable for tax payment and the tax authority, the person who pays the debt, and the person who receives the payment, may not specify which debt is appropriated, and thus, in this case, the total amount of the guaranteed debt to be repaid by a credit guarantee agency is clearly divided into principal and interest, and it is clearly specified that the credit

Therefore, the Defendant’s disposition of this case, which included the omission of interest income of this case additionally, in a different premise, was unlawful.

B) Agreement on the appropriation of performance (preliminary determination)

In addition, in the instant case, it is reasonable to deem that the Plaintiff bank and the credit guarantee agency reached an agreement on the order of appropriation of debt, as seen earlier, that the Plaintiff bank and the credit guarantee agency had undergone several times to determine the amount of principal and interest repayment as follows.

① The Plaintiff bank and credit guarantee institutions have concluded in advance agreements on the scope of principal and interest to be held liable for guarantee by credit guarantee institutions through credit guarantee terms and conditions.

② The Plaintiff bank shall calculate the principal and interest in accordance with the above agreement and enter them in the form of a request for the performance of guaranteed obligations presented by a credit guarantee agency (which classifys the details of calculation of principal and interest) and deliver them to the credit guarantee agency.

③ A credit guarantee agency confirmed the calculation details of the principal and interest stated in the above application and paid all of the amount claimed to the Plaintiff bank.

④ After receiving the payment for the performance of the above guaranteed obligation, the Plaintiff bank finally determined the amount of principal and interest repaid (which shall be additionally paid by the person who made a payment by subrogation from the date following the date when the claim for performance of ordinary guaranteed obligation is made to the actual date), and delivered

Therefore, this case constitutes “a special agreement on the repayment of loans and interest” as stipulated in Article 56 of the Enforcement Rule of the Corporate Tax Act, and there exists an agreement between the Plaintiff bank and the credit guarantee agency on the appropriation of debt, and thus, the order of appropriation of debt and principal under the above provision shall not be applied. In this respect, the Defendant’s first disposition against the Plaintiffs is unlawful.

2) As to the second disposition of this case

Since the Defendant asserts that the ground for the second disposition of this case is Article 73(4) of the former Corporate Tax Act, it is examined whether the Plaintiff bank is liable to withhold taxes under Article 73(4) and (1) of the former Corporate Tax Act.

According to Article 73 (4) and (1) 1 of the former Corporate Tax Act, a person who represents or is entrusted with a withholding agent shall withhold corporate tax on the interest income under Article 127 (1) 1 of the Income Tax Act paid to a domestic corporation within the scope of delegation or delegation, and pay it to the district tax office having jurisdiction over the place of tax payment by the 10th day of the month following

Meanwhile, Article 127 (2) of the Income Tax Act provides that a person who acts on behalf of, or has been entrusted with, a withholding agent under Article 127 (2) of the Income Tax Act refers to a person who is authorized or delegated to, the person liable to pay the income amount under each subparagraph of Article 127 (1) of the Income Tax Act in addition to paying the income amount to a withholding agent, i.e., the withholding agent and the withholding agent and the withholding agent, etc., to pay the withholding income tax at the competent tax office. Such delegation of withholding affairs may be made explicitly and implicitly. However, in light of the nature and effect of withholding taxes, there must be circumstances to presume the intention of delegation to the same extent as the case where an implied delegation is made (see Supreme Court Decision 2010Du21952, Jul. 24, 2014). This legal doctrine applies to cases where a person liable to pay withholding taxes under Article 73 (4) of the former Corporate Tax Act is interpreted as a person liable to pay withholding taxes.

On the other hand, the Plaintiff bank agreed to withdraw the face value of the relevant corporate bills from the current account when it opened a current account with the issuer of the corporate bills and when it makes a payment with the maturity of the issued corporate bills due to the maturity of the issued corporate bills. However, in full view of the following circumstances, it is difficult to see that the Plaintiff bank, in the instant case, was acting, explicitly or implicitly, or delegated its business, on behalf of the Plaintiff bank for the collection of withholding taxes on the discounted face value of the corporate bills from the company.

(1) The withholding system is an exceptional method of collecting taxes, which requires a payer of income who is not a taxpayer to pay taxes after deducting the amount of tax to be paid by the taxpayer from the amount of income, etc., and for the prevention of tax evasion and convenience in tax collection through the withholding system. However, a withholding agent is obliged to bear the expenses required for withholding taxes without consideration, and a withholding agent bears the risk of collecting not only additional taxes, but also the amount equivalent to the amount of tax to be paid through withholding. Therefore, considering the aspects of restrictions on property rights of a withholding agent, the withholding obligation shall be imposed only on a person who can easily and clearly ascertain the existence of the withholding obligation, the amount of withholding tax, and the timing thereof, and the interpretation of the tax-related Acts and subordinate statutes

② The Plaintiff bank entered into a current account agreement with the issuer of commercial papers, and the said current account agreement applies with the Plaintiff bank's free deposit contract. The Plaintiff bank paid the amount stated on the bill only when the bill was presented to the issuer within the period of payment presentation. Meanwhile, there is no evidence to deem that the Plaintiff bank and the issuer of commercial papers only limited the amount of face value of all bills including the instant commercial papers from the issuer of commercial papers, and there is no income subject to withholding. In addition, the Plaintiff bank can verify only the amount of the bill, maturity, place of payment, payment, date of issuance, etc., and whether the issuer of commercial papers issued the bill at discount, and whether the Plaintiff bank purchased the bill from the issuer of commercial papers or from the investor institution or from the issuer of commercial papers.

③ The original withholding agent is obligated to withhold the amount of income at the time of paying the amount of income, and thus, the payment of the amount of income under private law and the obligation to withhold the amount under public law are separate obligations. Therefore, it is difficult to deem that the Plaintiff bank was entrusted with the payment of the amount of the instant corporate bills from the issuing company of the corporate bills, solely on the ground that

④ The Plaintiff bank received only approximately KRW 10,000 per book of the face value for each bill from the issuing company of corporate bills with the commission for the entrustment of payment of promissory notes, and the Plaintiff bank cannot be deemed to have agreed on the payment of promissory notes on behalf of the withholding company in addition to the payment business of promissory notes.

⑤ Even if the content of the current account agreement entered into with the relevant corporate note issuer, it is difficult to find out circumstances to presume the intention to delegate the withholding business.

Therefore, on a different premise, the instant disposition against the Plaintiffs was unlawful on the ground that the Plaintiff bank did not perform its duty to withhold taxes equivalent to the discount amount of bills.

3) Sub-determination

In a litigation seeking revocation of a taxation, even where it is deemed that a taxation disposition is unlawful because it was erroneous in the process of calculating the amount of tax, when the amount of tax to be imposed lawfully is calculated based on the data submitted by the time the argument in the fact-finding trial is concluded, the court shall not revoke the entire amount of the taxation disposition as unlawful, but shall regard only the portion exceeding the reasonable amount of tax assessment as unlawful (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 97Nu19496, Sept.

Therefore, in relation to the first disposition of this case, the portion exceeding the amount in the first disposition of this case where the omission of interest income of this case was not included in the calculation of gross income. In addition, in relation to the second disposition of this case, the imposition of additional tax and additional tax on failure to withhold and pay corporate tax on the amount of interest income equivalent to the discount amount of this case on the premise that the Plaintiff bank bears the obligation to withhold and pay corporate tax on the amount of interest income of this case is unlawful.

Therefore, among the dispositions of this case, the part of the imposition of the tax amount listed in the attached Table 1 List 1 (2) for the taxable period listed in the attached Table 1 List (2) for the Plaintiff bank and the part of the imposition of the tax amount listed in the attached Table 2 against the Plaintiff financial holding company, which exceeds the stated tax amount, and the part of the imposition of the tax amount listed in the attached Table 2 List 1 (2) for the taxable period listed in the tax items

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiffs' claims of this case shall be accepted for all reasons, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

3

Relevant statutes

director of the former Financial Holding Companies Act (amended by Act No. 12099, Aug. 13, 2013)

Article 2 (Definitions)

(1) The definitions of terms used in this Act shall be as follows:

1. The term "financial holding company" means a company, the primary business of which is to control (hereinafter referred to as "control") companies carrying on financial business (hereinafter referred to as "financial institutions") or companies closely related to the operation of financial business through the ownership of their stocks (including equities; hereinafter the same shall apply) according to the standards prescribed by Presidential Decree, which falls under all of the following items:

(a) It shall control at least one financial institution;

(b) Total assets shall exceed the standards prescribed by Presidential Decree;

(c) To obtain authorization from the Financial Services Commission under Article 3;

【Civil Code

§ 479. Order of appropriation of performance to costs, interest and principal

(1) If a debtor is to pay expenses and interest of one or more obligations, and the person effecting performance has effected insufficient performance to satisfy the entire obligation, such performance shall be appropriated in the order of the expenses, the interest and the principal.

(2) Article 477 shall apply mutatis mutandis to the preceding paragraph.

director of the former Corporate Tax Act (amended by Act No. 11128, Dec. 31, 201)

Article 71 (Collection and Refund)

(3) If a withholding agent under Article 73 fails to collect an amount of tax to be collected or fails to pay the collected amount by the deadline for payment, the head of a tax office having jurisdiction over the place for tax payment shall, without delay, collect from the withholding agent an amount equivalent to the amount of tax to be withheld and paid as corporate tax plus penalty tax under Article 76 (2): Provided, That where the withholding agent fails to withhold taxes and the person liable for tax payment has already paid corporate

Article 76 (Additional Tax)

(2) Where a withholding agent referred to in Article 73 fails to pay a tax withheld or which must be withheld by the deadline for payment, or pays a shortage, he/she shall pay an amount calculated by adding the larger of the following amounts as additional taxes: Provided, That where the withholding agent is the State or a local government,

1. Tax amount unpaid (in cases of a shortage of tax paid), ¡¿ Period from the day following the payment deadline to the date of voluntary payment or the date of notice of tax payment ¡¿ interest rate prescribed by Presidential Decree in consideration of the interest rate applied by financial companies, etc. to overdue loans. In such cases, the amount shall be limited to 10/100 of the tax amount unpaid (in cases of a shortage of tax,

2. 5/100 of the unpaid tax amount (if underpaid, the deficient tax amount).

(7) Where a domestic corporation liable to submit a statement of payment under Articles 120 and 120-2 of this Act or Articles 164 and 164-2 of the Income Tax Act fails to do so by the deadline under Article 164 (1) and Article 164-2 (1) of the Income Tax Act, or where the statement of payment submitted under the same Article falls under unclear cases prescribed by Presidential Decree, the head of a tax office having jurisdiction over the place of tax payment shall collect, as corporate tax, an amount equivalent to 2/100 of the amount of payment not submitted or of the amount of payment unclear. In such cases, penalty tax shall be collected even

(1) The former Corporate Tax Act (Amended by Act No. 11607, Jan. 1, 2013)

Article 1 (Definitions)

The terms used in this Act shall be defined as follows:

6. The term "integrated tax return system" means the method of reporting and paying corporate tax pursuant to Chapter II-3 by making two or more domestic corporations to calculate one tax base and the amount of tax;

Article 73 (Withholding)

(1) Where a person who pays any of the following amounts (including the amount of income of a corporation operating a financial or insurance business, but excluding those prescribed by Presidential Decree among income paid to a financial company, etc. prescribed by Presidential Decree and income exempt from corporate tax or other income prescribed by Presidential Decree) to a domestic corporation (hereafter in this Article, a withholding agent) pays such amount, he/she shall withhold corporate tax equivalent to the amount calculated by applying the tax rate of 14/100 (25/100 in cases of income for a non-business loan under Article 16 (1) 11 of the Income Tax Act) to the amount paid, and shall pay it at the tax office having jurisdiction over the place

1. Interest income amount under Article 127 (1) 1 of the Income Tax Act;

(4) Paragraph (1) shall apply to the act of a person who represents or is commissioned by a withholding agent, deeming him/her as the act of the principal or mandator within the scope of authorization or delegation.

(5) Where a financial company, etc. prescribed by Presidential Decree acquires, trades, arranges, or acts as an agent for, a bill or debt certificate issued by a domestic corporation (including residents; hereafter the same shall apply in this paragraph) pursuant to paragraph (1), it shall be deemed that the relationship between the financial company, etc. and the domestic corporation exists and paragraph

Article 76-8 (Application, etc. of Consolidated Tax Return System)

(1) A domestic corporation (excluding a corporation prescribed by Presidential Decree, such as a nonprofit corporation) and another domestic corporation wholly controlled by the relevant domestic corporation (excluding a corporation prescribed by Presidential Decree, such as a corporation in the process of liquidation; hereafter in this Chapter, a complete subsidiary corporation) may apply the consolidated tax return system with approval from the Commissioner of the National Tax Service as prescribed by Presidential Decree. In such cases, where there are two or more complete subsidiary corporations, all the relevant corporations shall apply

【Enforcement Decree of the Corporate Tax Act

Article 111 (Withholding)

(6) For the purposes of Article 73 of the Act, the timing for payment of interest income shall be the date prescribed in each subparagraph of Article 190 of the Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act: Provided, That where a corporation under Article 61 (2) 1 through 7 and 10 issues and sells bills under the conditions under subparagraph 1 of Article 190 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, it shall withhold the interest, etc. on the date of discount sale of the relevant bills, deeming that the interest, etc. is paid on the date of discount sale, and the amount of income attributed to the trust property operated by a trust business entity under the Financial Investment Services

【Enforcement Rule of Corporate Tax Act

Article 56 (Calculation of Interest Income Amount Subject to Withholding Tax)

In the application of the provisions of Article 73 of the Act, if a loan and part of the amount equivalent to the interest on the loan have been paid without any special agreement on the repayment of the loan and interest, the interest shall be deemed to have been paid first: Provided, That in the case of profits of non-business loan, the provisions of Article 51 (7) of the Enforcement Decree of