1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Details of the disposition

A. The Plaintiff received KRW 350 million in total from B on May 12, 2011, and KRW 350 million on June 3, 2011.

On April 12, 2013, the director of Busan Regional Tax Office, in the course of investigating the illegal entertainment business related to B, notified the Defendant of the taxation data that the Plaintiff omitted the return of global income tax, even if he received from B the amount of KRW 250 million (the remaining amount after subtracting the amount of KRW 100 million deemed immediately returned, which was the amount of KRW 350 million which was the retirement allowance) from B as retirement allowance.

B. On March 10, 2014, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of KRW 112,572,010 as global income tax for the year 201, on the ground that the Plaintiff received KRW 250,000 from B as retirement allowances constituted other income.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”). C.

The Plaintiff appealed and filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal on June 2, 2014, but was dismissed on September 3, 2014.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 4 (including various numbers for each type of evidence), the purport of the whole pleading and determination

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Plaintiff loaned to B a total of KRW 160 million on December 4, 2009, KRW 80 million on June 17, 2010, KRW 50 million on June 17, 2010, and KRW 160 million on July 20, 2010, and KRW 160 million on KRW 250,000,000 received from B, out of KRW 250,000,000 paid from B.

Therefore, according to the plaintiff's assertion that the amount of retirement allowances received from B is KRW 100 million ( KRW 90 million if the plaintiff offered KRW 160 million from KRW 250 million to KRW 160 million, but according to the contents of the plaintiff's assertion in the appeal to the Tax Tribunal, it seems that the plaintiff received KRW 10 million separately from the above KRW 90 million).

Therefore, the instant disposition based on the premise that the total amount of KRW 250 million is retirement allowance is illegal.

B. In fact, the Plaintiff received KRW 200 million from B on June 3, 2011, and determined KRW 200 million as retirement allowances.