logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산고등법원 2020.02.12 2019누23883
법인지방소득세 부과처분취소
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. We affirm the fact-finding and judgment of the first instance court, even after examining the defendant's assertion and reason for appeal presented in the first instance court and the first instance court after closely examining the evidence submitted in the first instance court and the first instance court.

Therefore, this court's reasoning is that it is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the judgment like Paragraph (2) is added to the defendant's argument, and therefore it is citing it as it is in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420

2. Determination on addition

A. The Local Tax Act (amended by Act No. 13427, Jul. 24, 2015; hereinafter “amended Local Tax Act”) amended by Act No. 13427, supra, does not have any separate applicable provision as to corporate local income tax differently from individual local income tax, and thus, in imposing the instant disposition against the Plaintiff, the amended Local Tax Act shall not apply, and the issue of local tax (not having any separate provision on additional tax) during which the Plaintiff’s obligation to pay corporate local income tax was in force at the time of the establishment of the liability to pay corporate local income tax ought to be applied.

Therefore, the instant disposition imposing corporate local income tax on the premise that there is no limit on corporate local income tax is legitimate.

B. In light of the determination, the Defendant imposed the instant disposition of corporate local income tax (additional tax to be submitted) calculated by applying Article 103-30(5) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 26431, Jul. 24, 2015) instead of the amended Local Tax Act with respect to the Plaintiff in proportion to the proportional distribution ratio prescribed in Article 88 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 26431, Jul. 24, 2015), and even where the Defendant imposed corporate local income tax (additional tax to be submitted) pursuant to the Local Tax Act at issue, pursuant to Article 86(2) of the Act and

arrow