Seoul Administrative Court 2009Guhap14392 ( September 10, 2009)

Seocho 208west 3656 ( December 31, 2008)

The fact that the customer was subject to a tax investigation cannot be said to have known in advance that the correction was made.

It is argued that the customer reported the correction in advance by having contact with each other on the fact that he was subject to the tax investigation, but this is a unilateral assertion based on the abstract side, so the recovered amount shall not be deemed to be the outflow from the company.

The contents of the decision shall be the same as attached.

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

1. Purport of claim

The Defendant’s disposition of imposition of global income tax of KRW 197,427,960 for the Plaintiff on August 1, 2008 exceeds KRW 13,794,875 of global income tax for the year 2003 and the disposition of imposition of KRW 39,753,290 of global income tax for the year 2004 shall be revoked, respectively.

2. Purport of appeal

The judgment of the first instance is revoked. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

The reasoning for the court's explanation on this case is the same as the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, this Court shall accept it in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Therefore, the judgment of the first instance court is legitimate, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.