Both parties to the lawsuit (Attorneys Jeong Byung-chul et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

The director of the tax office

April 18, 2008

Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2006Guhap46534 decided Nov. 7, 2007

1. All appeals filed by the plaintiff and the defendant are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by each party.

1. Purport of claim

The defendant's disposition of imposition of corporate tax of 268,736,63 won for the business year of 1999, corporate tax of 623,039,252 won for the business year of 200, corporate tax of 919,09,380 won for the business year of 2001, corporate tax of 503,272,680 won for the business year of 2002, corporate tax of 383,781,620 for the business year of 203, corporate tax of 2003, corporate tax of 383,781,620 for the business year of 204, and corporate tax of 10,972,520 for the business year of 204

2. Purport of Plaintiff’s appeal

The part against the plaintiff in the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked. Each part of the disposition imposing each claim shall be revoked.

3. Purport of defendant's appeal

The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance shall be revoked. The plaintiff's claim corresponding to the above revocation shall be dismissed in entirety.

1. cite the judgment of the first instance; and

The court's reasoning concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of the first instance, except for the part written by the court under Paragraph (2) below. Thus, the court's reasoning is cited by Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Parts to be dried;

(a) by inserting “overseas exporters” in Chapter 3, Chapter 28, of the first instance judgment (the fourth, following), to “overseas importers”;

(b) by inserting Part 5, Section 1, " was in effect".

(c) in Chapter 8, Chapter 19, the term “the funeral period” has been changed to read “the funeral period”;

d. No. 8. 20 No. 8. . ........ ......... ................

(e) in Part 9, Chapter 3, the term "roscopic from a violation" shall be applied to "roscopic from a violation."

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the judgment of the court of first instance is legitimate, and both the plaintiff and the defendant's appeal are dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Choi Byung-su (Presiding Judge)