Daejeon District Court 2015Guhap100685 ( October 29, 2015)

Most of necessary expenses are located in the taxpayer's territory and burden of proof exists for taxpayers.

The burden of proof of necessary expenses claimed by the plaintiff is the taxpayer, but there is a lack of objective data to prove such necessary expenses.

Article 27 (Calculation of Necessary Expenses of Business Income)

Daejeon High Court 2015Nu13718 global income and revocation of disposition

OO

O Head of tax office

Daejeon District Court 2015Guhap10685

2016.05.26

oly 2016.23

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasoning for the court’s explanation on this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance except for the addition or dismissal of the following parts. Thus, it is acceptable to accept this as it is in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. A portion used for adding or cutting;

(a) The following parts shall be added between conduct 16 and conduct 17 of the first instance judgment:

"If a person liable for tax payment finds any revenue of omitted sales, etc. in filing a return on the tax base of corporate tax, etc., the competent tax office may include the omitted revenue in gross income, and if the taxpayer has omitted the return on the revenue to be included in gross income, not only the omission of the return on the revenue to be included in gross income in filing a return on the tax base, etc. but also the expenses to be included in deductible expenses, the existence and the amount of such expenses shall be determined by the verification of the person who asserts the inclusion in deductible expenses, and unless there is no such proof, such separate expenses shall be determined. In this case, unlike the method of determining the total deductible expenses, only the deductible expenses corresponding to the omission portion cannot be calculated by the estimation method, not by the field investigation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 9Du4556, Nov. 12, 199)."

B. On the 5th judgment of the first instance court, "in this case, the remaining expenses shall not be determined by the method of estimated investigation," and "in this case, only the necessary expenses corresponding to the omitted income amount shall not be calculated and deducted by the method of estimated investigation, not by the on-site investigation."

3. Conclusion

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