Seoul Administrative Court-2017-Gu Partnership-52115 ( April 19, 2018)

The legality of the recognition and recognition of the representative of a corporation under the name.

A person who actually operates a corporation appears to be CCC, and the plaintiff was registered only in the form of representative director or director in the name of the corporation of this case, and cannot be deemed to have actually operated the company of this case, the judgment of the court below is justifiable.

Article 67 of the Corporate Tax Act

2018Nu46287 Comprehensive Income and Revocation of Disposition

AA

a) the Director of the Tax Office

Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2017Guhap52115 decided April 19, 2018

November 26, 2018

on October 1, 2018 09

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

1. Purport of claim

The Defendant’s disposition of imposition of global income tax of KRW 223,897,420 (including additional tax) for the year 201 owed to the Plaintiff on May 26, 2016 shall be revoked.

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 reason why the court uses this case is the same as the entry of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, it is citing this in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

[In full view of the circumstances as indicated in its holding, the first instance court: (a) appears to have been actually operated by the corporation of this case at the time of the business year 201; (b) the Plaintiff was registered in the form of representative director or director under the name of the corporation of this case; and (c) cannot be deemed to have actually operated the corporation of this case; and (d) based on the judgment of the court below, accepted the Plaintiff’s claim. In the first instance court, the Defendant committed the same arguments in the first instance court basically repeatedly; (c) even if the Defendant considered the allegations partially supplemented and compared the presented evidence with the record and closely

2. Conclusion

If so, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just as it is, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed.