Busan High Court 2016Nu20708 (2016.08)

(C) Even if the processing expenses are disposed of as provisional receipts, it is reasonable to view the provisional receipts as a nominal obligation not to set up a Ban.

(Summary of the original trial) The processing expenses of the non-party company were disposed of as provisional receipts, and even if the provisional receipts were disposed of as the profits from debt exemption, so long as they were appropriated as provisional receipts, it shall not be deemed as non-presumed provisional receipts, and it shall not be deemed as non-presumed provisional receipts, and the non-party company's assertion that they were disposed of as the profits from debt exemption without filing a revised report is difficult to believe

Article 40 of the Corporate Tax Act; Article 106 of the Enforcement Decree of the Corporate Tax Act

2016Du46892. Revocation of notice of change in income amount

AA Corporation

BB Director of the Tax Office

The second instance decision

Busan High Court Decision 2016Nu20807 Decided July 8, 2016

November 10, 2016

1. The appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

All of the records of this case and the judgment of the court below and the grounds of appeal were examined, but the grounds of appeal by the appellant are not included in the grounds provided by each subparagraph of Article 4(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure for Appeal. Thus, the appeal is dismissed pursuant to Article 5 of the same Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent