1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Details of the disposition

B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant corporation”) was established on May 10, 2012 for the purpose of interior decoration and interior decoration, housing repair and human resources supply business, and was ex officio closed on December 31, 2013, and the Plaintiff was registered as the representative director in the corporate register of the instant corporation from August 20, 2012 to October 23, 2013.

Around October 2015, the head of the Dong Tax Office, at the same time, estimated the tax base and tax amount as standard expense rate for corporate tax-free returns of this case for the 2012,25,840 won of estimated income, and determined the corporate tax of 15,524,981 won of estimated income, and disposed of the said estimated income of 112,255,840 won as the representative director during the business year of 2013 to the plaintiff and C, who held office as the representative director, and notified the change in the income amount as shown below.

The Defendant was notified by the head of the same tax office of the income amount to which the representative income classification business year belongs, of the Plaintiff’s bonus from January 1, 2013 to December 31, 2013, as the bonus of KRW 95,03,026 C from January 1, 2013 to December 31, 2013, to December 31, 2013, and of the amount of KRW 17,222,814 from December 31, 2013, and notified the Plaintiff on December 1, 2016 of the global income tax amount of KRW 23,295,510 from the global income tax for the business year 2013.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”). On January 24, 2017, the Plaintiff appealed to the instant disposition and filed a petition for review with the National Tax Service for the instant disposition, asserting that the Plaintiff’s registration with the National Tax Service as the representative director of the instant corporation was unlawful, since it was true or in form, and did not actually operate the company.

However, on April 20, 2017, the National Tax Service rejected the Plaintiff’s assertion that the Plaintiff did not operate the corporation of this case as the representative director in its form. However, the Plaintiff’s assertion that the Plaintiff had been registered as the representative director on the register of corporate register was divided by 296 days from January 1, 2013 to October 23, 2013, and corrected the tax base and tax amount and dismissed the remainder of the Plaintiff’s assertion.

The defendant is the first case.