The judgment below is reversed and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. In a case where a corporation’s wrongful calculation division under Article 52 of the Corporate Tax Act unfairly avoided or reduces tax burden by abusing the various forms of transactions listed in each subparagraph of Article 88(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Corporate Tax Act without using a reasonable method by a person with a special relationship, the said corporate tax authority is deemed to have denied it and have the income deemed objective and reasonable by the method stipulated in the Act and subordinate statutes. In light of the economic person’s position, it shall be limited to a case where it is deemed that the person with a taxation authority neglected the economic rationality by calculating an unnatural and unreasonable act. Determination of whether an economic rationality exists should be made based on whether the transaction lacks economic rationality in light of sound social norms and commercial practices, considering the various circumstances of the transaction.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Du19294, Nov. 29, 2012). 2. Review of the reasoning of the lower judgment reveals the following facts. A.

The Plaintiff is a corporation established on June 29, 1998 for the purpose of casino business, tourist hotel business, etc. on the basis of a special Act on the Assistance to the Development of Abandoned Mine Areas. It is a corporation established on June 29, 199 for the purpose of carrying on a marina business in collaboration with a private company for the purpose of carrying on a marina business around December 201.

B. On July 26, 2012, the Plaintiff submitted a letter of deposit stating the reason for the designation deposit as the “contribution to revitalize the regional economy through the inducement of normalization of the Taecheon Tourism Development Project,” and stating the purpose of use and purpose of use as the “contribution to revitalize the regional economy through the inducement of normalization through the support of funds for emergency operation of the Taecheon Tourism Development Project,” and submitted a letter of deposit stating that it will deposit KRW 15 billion at the Tae Taecheon City. At that time, the Plaintiff deposited the designated donation by opening the Deliberative Committee on Contribution.