beta
Case Number of the immediately preceding lawsuit
Seoul High Court-2016-Nu-51914 ( October 07, 2016)
Title
(C) deny the claim for the name change of a spouse's place of business, considering that the father's economic benefits together have been enjoyed by the father.
Summary
(C) In light of the above legal principles, it is difficult to view that the other spouse did not participate in the business operation of the place of business on the sole basis of the fact that one spouse was subject to criminal punishment due to criminal facts in the place of business.
Related statutes
Article 14 of the Framework Act on National Taxes
Cases
2016du571 global income and revocation of such disposition
Plaintiff-Appellant
OO
Defendant-Appellee
O Head of tax office
Judgment of the lower court
Seoul High Court Decision 2016Nu31946 Decided October 7, 2016
Imposition of Judgment
January 18, 2017
Text
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.
Reasons
All of the judgment below and the appellate brief examined the records of this case, but the appellant's grounds of appeal are not included in the grounds provided by each subparagraph of Article 4 (1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure of Appeal, or are recognized to be groundless. Thus, the appeal is dismissed pursuant to Article 5 of the same Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of