(영문) 대구고등법원 2017.01.20 2015누7242 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대구고등법원 2017.01.20 2015누7242

법인세부과처분취소

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation as to this case is as follows, and the reasoning for the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that for the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of the judgment as stipulated in Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act with respect to the contents alleged by the plaintiff in the trial.

The second sentence of the first instance court's decision "12,617,170,700 won" shall be "12,616,170,700 won".

The 5th sentence of the first instance court shall add "the establishment of a plaintiff" to "the 5th sentence," "the other hand," and "MM group."

The 7th sentence of the first instance court's decision "Fence of November 8, 2010" is "Fence of November 18, 2010".

From June 2011, "from June 201 to June 8, 2010" of the 7th judgment of the first instance court shall be "from June 201 to June 9."

In accordance with the 7th sentence of the first instance court's decision, the following facts are stated: "The plaintiff's report of impossibility of compulsory execution (Evidence A5) for the development of a e-mailed city is "Seoul-dong 837-11, Seoul-dong Mad City Development Head Office (Seoul-dong 837-11), and the reason for impossibility of execution is "No movable property owned by the debtor without the debtor's residence." The above reason for impossibility of execution is the content that A credit information company had been already confirmed in the course of conducting a field investigation by visiting the place of business of a e-city development at the request of e-mail, the transfer of the merger of this case (Evidence A6) around March 28, 2011, at the time of reporting the tax base and tax amount of corporate tax for the business year 2011, the plaintiff submitted additional evidence of non-performance of bad debt activities (Evidence evidence 3)."

The term "specific circumstances" in the 9th to 4th sentence of the first instance court.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

-행정소송법 제8조 제2항

유사 판례

-대구고등법원 2017. 1. 20. 선고 2015누7242 판결

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.09.11 2018나17418

-서울고등법원 2015.07.17 2014나2038911

-부산고등법원(창원) 2015.08.27 2015나20301

-대구지방법원 2018.10.18 2018나306124