1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant in excess of the order of revocation below shall be revoked, and

1. The reasons why the court should explain concerning this part of the disposition are the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance (as stated in the second through fifth, third and fifth, and fifth, “the reasons why the disposition is taken”) except for the following parts. As such, it shall be cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Part 19 of the 3rd judgment of the first instance court (hereinafter referred to as "Korea- Germany Tax Treaty") shall be referred to as "Korea- Germany Tax Treaty."

The part of the first instance court’s “107,937,797,91,” under the fourth Schedule of the first instance court’s decision, shall be “107,937,797.91,” and the part of the first instance court’s “107,937,797.91,” shall be considered as “107,937,97.91,” and the part of the first instance court’s “Korea- Germany Tax Treaty” under the fourth Schedule of the first instance court’s decision shall be

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

가. 당사자의 주장 ⑴ 원고 ㈎ C이 이 사건 배당소득의 수익적 소유자이므로 한독 조세조약의 제한세율 5%를 적용해야 한다.

If C denies the beneficial owner on the ground that it is only a type company as a special purpose company even though domestic tax law treats domestic special purpose company as a source of income, it is in violation of the principle of non-discrimination in the Korea-Japan Tax Treaty.

㈏ 설령 B가 이 사건 배당소득의 수익자라 하더라도, 국내세법상 과세실체가 될 수 있으므로 한독 조세조약의 적용대상인 ‘법인’인 점, 이 사건 배당소득과 관련하여 독일에서 영업세를 납부하였으므로 한독 조세조약의 적용대상인 거주자인 점, 원고의 발행주식 100%를 직접 보유한 것으로 볼 수 있는 점 등을 고려할 때, 한독 조세조약의 제한세율 5%를 적용해야 한다.

㈐ 설령 B의 투자자들이 이 사건 배당소득의 수익적 소유자라 하더라도, 한독 조세조약과 '대한민국 정부와 룩셈부르크 정부간의 소득 및 자본에 대한 조세의 이중과세회피와 탈세방지를 위한...