1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited in this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, in addition to the parts to be filled or added below, and thus, it shall be cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The 3rd to 16th parallels in the first instance judgment shall be followed as follows:

Article 14(1) of the Framework Act on National Taxes declares the principle of substantial taxation by stating, “If the ownership of the income, profit, property, act, or transaction subject to taxation is merely nominal, and there is another person to whom such income, profit, act, or transaction belongs, the person to whom such income, profit, or transaction belongs shall be liable

Therefore, in case where there is a person who substantially controls and manages the subject of taxation, such as income, profit, property, act, transaction, etc. different from the nominal owner, the nominal owner for the type and appearance, not the nominal owner, but the person who substantially controls and manages the subject of taxation in accordance with the principle of substantial taxation, should be the taxpayer.

In addition, such cases should be determined by comprehensively taking into account various circumstances, such as the details of the use of the name, the details of the agreement by the parties, the degree and scope of the nominal owner's involvement, the relationship of internal responsibility and calculation, the materials of independent management and disposition authority

Taxation Summary

As a matter of principle, the tax authority bears the burden of proving the existence and tax base of the facts. This is also the same in the absence of special circumstances, such as a separate legal provision converting the burden of proof, even in a case where the title of transaction, etc. and the actual subject of attribution

However, as long as the tax authority considers the business title holder as the actual business owner and imposed tax, it is necessary for the business title holder who received the taxation to claim and prove that the ownership of transaction, etc. is different.