Incheon District Court 2007Guu4555 (Law No. 26, 2008)

National High Court Decision 2006J 2819 (Law No. 22, 2007)

If an omission in sales has been counted as a penalty, whether it is an outflow from the company

Even if the cash, which is the counterpart account, was appropriated in the provisional account, was settled as having been entered in a corporation once, if the contents of the provisional account were to enter the short-term loan transaction from the representative director, it shall be deemed to be the outflow of the company.

The contents of the decision shall be the same as attached.

Article 67 (Disposition of Income)

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked. Each disposition of the Defendant rendered against the Plaintiff on February 28, 2006 that imposed corporate tax of KRW 72,918,500 for the business year 200 and corporate tax of KRW 73,578,980 for the business year 2001, and each disposition of KRW 81,585,250 for the Plaintiff on March 2, 2006 in excess of KRW 81,585,250 for the notice of change in the amount of income for the business year 2000 and exceeding KRW 69,511,90 for the notice of change in the amount of income for the business year 134,51,90 for the business year 201 shall be revoked.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasoning for this Court's explanation is as follows: "Nos. 15-1 or 126-1 or 126-1 or 6-2 of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be changed to "Nos. 15-1 or 126 of the evidence Nos. 15-1 or 126 of the judgment of the court of first instance," and "No. 6-1 or 22 of the evidence Nos. 15" shall be changed to "no. 1 or 22 of the judgment of the court of first instance," and "no. 6-2 of the plaintiff's assertion is justified," and therefore, it shall be cited by Article 8 (2)

Parts to be added

In addition, even though the cash, which is the counterpart account, was appropriated in the provisional gold account, for which the contents of the price received by the corporation from the sale have not been determined, and the account was opened as the entry of the corporation once, it was found that the contents of the provisional gold account was the most short-term loan transaction from the representative director, and thus, it is not related to the profits or expenses of the corporation, as it does not result in the change or increase of the net assets of the corporation, and thus, it is irrelevant to the profits or expenses of the corporation, barring any special circumstance such as the processed debt under the pretext that the debt of the provisional gold is not planned against the first half of the total assets of the corporation. Thus, the omitted amount of the sales should have been entered as the profits of the corporation in the account is already leaked from the company to the representative director, who is the counterpart to the above provisional gold account (Supreme Court Decision 200Du3726, Jan. 11, 202). Thus, the plaintiff's assertion that the above provisional gold account continued to constitute the issue of the plaintiff's claim.

2. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case shall be dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just and it is so decided as per Disposition as the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.