Seoul Administrative Court 2014Guhap12031 (Law No. 15, 26 June 2015)

2013west 4536 (20 December 20, 2014)

Only because some of the details of remittance of the purchase price are different from the fact, purchase cannot be deemed false or processed.

It is difficult to readily conclude that most of the sales were processed and sold at the time of tax investigation conducted in 2009-2010 by the purchaser, and the transaction in 2011 is also processed. The fact that the endorser of a check used at the time of payment of the purchase is not related to the purchaser, or that some of the details of remittance of the purchase are different from the fact cannot be deemed false

Article 19 (Scope of Deductible Expenses)

2015Nu50971 Revocation of Disposition of Corporate Tax Imposition

O Co., Ltd.

O Head of tax office

National Flag

March 15, 2016

April 12, 2016

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

1. Purport of claim

In February 15, 2013, the Defendant revoked the disposition imposing corporate tax of KRW 52,842,490 on the Plaintiff in the business year 2011.

2. Purport of appeal

The judgment of the first instance is revoked. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasoning for this Court’s explanation is as follows: (a) the reasoning for this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance except for the addition of “(2005du16406, Apr. 14, 2006)” following the judgment of the first instance, and therefore, (b) it shall be cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Conclusion

Therefore, the judgment of the first instance court is justifiable, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit.