Whether the actual representative director of a corporation and the actual income amount accrue;

The plaintiff has the burden of proving that the plaintiff was not the actual representative of the non-party company, and that the plaintiff is not the actual owner of the income amount of this case. Since the evidence documents submitted by the plaintiff alone are insufficient to recognize it, the defendant's taxation

Article 14 of the Framework Act on National Taxes

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

The Defendant’s disposition of imposing global income tax of KRW 98,347,820 on the Plaintiff on July 1, 2005 shall be revoked.

1. Details of the imposition;

A. From October 31, 1999, the Plaintiff was appointed as a joint representative director of the O-Information Technology Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the “O-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-

B. The non-party company received three false tax invoices (hereinafter referred to as the "tax invoices of this case") in total amount of KRW 285,000,000 (hereinafter referred to as the "value of supply of this case") from the supply value of OOE Co., Ltd. without real transaction during the 1st taxable period of the value-added tax (from January 1, 2000 to June 30, 200) and included them in the calculation of losses in filing a return of the corporate tax base and tax amount for the year 200.

C. On January 13, 2005, the head of the OO head of the tax office added the supply value of this case to deductible expenses and added it to corporate income, and then disposed of 156,750,000 won, each of which is divided in proportion to the total amount of the supply value and the value-added tax, as bonus, to the Plaintiff and OO, who is the joint representative director of the non-party company, and notified the changes in the amount of income.

D. On January 20, 2005, the Defendant received the notice from the head of the OO tax office on the taxation data, and notified the Plaintiff of KRW 98,347,820, global income tax for the year 2005, and notified the Plaintiff of KRW 98,347,820, uf0, uf09.

E. The plaintiff appealed and filed an appeal with the National Tax Tribunal on January 17, 2006, but was dismissed on November 6, 2006.

[Reasons for Recognition] Gap 1, 3, 7, Eul 1-2, Eul 2-2

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The tax invoice of this case was purchased by thisO, the other co-representative of this case, the plaintiff, and the actual representative of the non-party company, and the plaintiff was merely the team leader of the network business team. The O prepared a confirmation document (Evidence A2) that the plaintiff is responsible for taxes, etc. under the tax invoice of this case, and thus the actual owner of the income equivalent to the value of supply of this case is obvious as the OO, and thus, the defendant's disposition of this case, which reported otherwise, is unlawful.

(b) Related statutes;

It is as shown in the attached Form.

C. Determination

(1) Article 106(1)1 (proviso) of the Enforcement Decree of the Corporate Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 17033, Dec. 29, 200; hereinafter the same) provides that the payment system for the recognition of the representative of the disposal of income pursuant to the disposal of income pursuant to the proviso of Article 106(1)1 of the Enforcement Decree of the Corporate Tax Act shall not be based on the fact that such income has accrued to the representative, but shall be deemed as a bonus to the representative without any conditions, regardless of substance, for a specific fact that can be recognized as such act in order to prevent unfair acts under tax law by the corporation (see Supreme Court Decision 92Nu3120, Jul. 14, 1992; 200; hereinafter the same shall apply). If a corporation fails to enter its sales in the account book or appropriates the cost of processing in the account book, it is necessary to establish the special circumstance that the representative representative of the corporation who asserts that the amount of the disposal of income should not be actually distributed to the representative (see Supreme Court Decision 2010Du1676, etc.).

(2) As the Plaintiff asserts in this case, the Plaintiff was not the actual representative of the non-party company, and the actual owner of the income amount of this case is the Plaintiff bears the burden of proof. The Plaintiff’s testimony of the non-party company Nos. 2 and 5 and part of the witness testimony of the non-party company Nos. 4 is not sufficient to acknowledge it, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. However, considering the following facts, the non-party company’s statement Nos. 4 and 5 and the witness testimony of the non-party company Nos. 4 and the whole purport of the arguments, the non-party company is a small number of employees, including the Plaintiff who are the joint representative director and the non-indicted No. 25 million won, and the Plaintiff and the non-party Nos. 25 million won invested in the non-party company’s investment of the non-party company and the non-party company’s representative director of the business network team and the non-party No. 4 were the joint representative director of the non-party company and the non-party company No. O's.

(3) Therefore, the instant disposition against the Plaintiff is lawful, and the Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim shall be rejected as it is without merit, and it shall be decided as per Disposition.

public official law, order of law,

Article 14 (Basic Taxation to National Tax)

(1) Where uf09e property uf09e property uf09e property belongs to uf09e act or transaction, and there is another person to whom such income belongs, uf09e property belongs, uf09e property shall be the person to whom such income belongs as a taxpayer

Article 67 (Disposal of Income)

In filing a report on the tax base of corporate tax on the income for each business year under the provisions of Article 60 or in determining or revising the tax base of corporate tax under the provisions of Article 66 or 69, the amount included in the calculation of earnings shall be disposed of as bonus, dividends, and other outflow from the company, retained reserves, etc. according to the person to

Enforcement Decree of the Corporate Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 17033 of Dec. 29, 2000)

Article 106 (Disposition of Income)

(1) The amount included in the calculation of earnings under the provisions of Article 67 of the Act shall be disposed of pursuant to the provisions of the following subparagraphs. The same shall also apply to non-profit domestic corporations

1. Where the amount included in the calculation of earnings has clearly leaked out of the company, the dividends, bonuses from the disposition of profits, other income, and other outflow from the company under each of the following items according to the person to whom they accrue: Provided, That where the accrual is unclear, it shall be deemed to have been reverted to the representative (where the total number of stocks held by an officer who is not a minority shareholder under the provisions of Article 87 (2) and persons with a special relationship under the provisions of paragraph (4) of the same Article is 30% or more of the total number of stocks issued or total investment amount of the relevant corporation and the officer actually controls the operation of the corporation, he shall be deemed the representative, and where a corporation which has been exempted from withholding taxes under the provisions of Article 46 (12) of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act reports that there is a separate representative among the officers who are stockholders, the reported person shall be the representative, and where there

(b) If the person to whom it belongs is an officer or employee, the bonus to the person to whom it reverts;

Enforcement Rule of Corporate Tax Act (amended by Ordinance of the Ministry of Finance and Economy No. 307 of March 26, 2003)

Article 54 (Representative bonus Disposal Method)

In the application of the proviso to Article 106 (1) 1 of the Decree, where the representative is changed during a business year, where it is clear that the amount reverted to each representative is divided into representatives and disposed of to each representative, and where the reversion is unclear, it shall be calculated by dividing it according to the number of days of service period and disposed as bonus