logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2018.07.13 2018구합838
종합소득세 부과 처분 취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. B registered the business under the trade name of “C Licensed Real Estate Agent Office” at the Seoan City on April 16, 2009. On May 29, 2009, B purchased KRW 2,409,000 in total of KRW 30,000,000 in the Manan-gu Office (hereinafter “instant officetel”). From June 2009, B transferred these KRW 3,780,000 in total until June 2009.

B. As a result of the investigation of the value-added tax on B from May 19, 2014 to June 7, 2014, the director of the tax office of astronomicalan determined that the Plaintiff and B did not report the value-added tax on the instant officetels while jointly conducting a business.

Accordingly, on August 1, 2014, the director of the tax office of Yananananan District Tax Office imposed KRW 236,963,010 on B for the first period of value-added tax in 2009, and designated both the Plaintiff and E as a joint taxpayer of value-added tax and imposed the first period of value-added tax in 2009 on the Plaintiff and notified the Defendant of the taxation data.

C. On March 9, 2017, the Defendant imposed the global income tax of KRW 126,760,480 on the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff did not pay the global income tax on the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff received the distribution of profits while running a joint business with B and E.

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). 【No dispute over the grounds for recognition”, Gap evidence Nos. 38, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff did not operate the business jointly with B and E. (2) The Plaintiff did not generate profits from the acquisition and transfer of the instant officetels, and the Plaintiff did not have received profits from B.

(b) Entry in the attached Form of relevant statutes;

C. 1) Determination 1) The following facts are acknowledged in full view of the contents of Gap evidence No. 35 and Eul evidence Nos. 33 through 6, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

① B In order to raise funds for the acquisition of the instant officetel around May 2009, the F Bank shall pay KRW 2,100,000,000 by the Plaintiff’s recommendation.

arrow