early 2011Gu2894

The profit from disposal of fixed assets not directly used for proper purpose business shall be the income of the nonprofit corporation for each business year.

Income generated from the disposal of fixed assets not used directly for the proper purpose business is income of a non-profit corporation for each business year, and the real estate in this case has not been used directly for the medical business for three years or more, the transfer of 3.1 billion won to 2.3 billion won, and the under-reported 80 million won was confirmed to have been divulged to the president. Thus, the disposition

2011Guhap3045 Notice of Change in Amount of Income

Medical Corporations AAAAA Medical Foundation

Racing Head of the Tax Office

October 26, 2011

November 23, 2011

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

On June 16, 2010, the Defendant’s notification of the change in the income amount of 800,000, and 000, the income amount of 2006, the income income earner of the Plaintiff was revoked to the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

가. 원고는 2004. 5. 17. 소외 송CC, 서BB이 토지, 건물 및 예금을 출연하여 설립 한 재단법인으로서 QQQQ병원을 운영하고 있고, 서BB은 원고의 이사장이다.

B. In imposing corporate tax for the business year of 2006, the Plaintiff reported that the Plaintiff transferred 00-0 m2,350 m2,000 m2,000 m2, and 3,848.77 m2, and 192 m2 in the same 00-0 m2, and 192 m2 (hereinafter collectively referred to as the “the instant real estate”), which was acquired on June 24, 2005, to the OO-dong 00-0 m2,350 m2,000,000 m2,706.

C. The defendant confirmed that the plaintiff in fact transferred the real estate in this case to 3,150,00,000, and omitted 800,000,000 won in the report, and corrected and notified 194,744, and 290 won in the business year 2006 as corporate tax in the calculation of earnings, and the above 800,000,000 won as bonus to B on June 16, 2010 on the ground that the 80,000,000 won was used by west (hereinafter "the disposition in this case"). The defendant notified the change in income amount for the business year 2006 (hereinafter "the disposition in this case").

D. On September 1, 2010, the Plaintiff filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal on September 1, 201, but on May 201.

17. was dismissed.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 to 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion is as follows.

The disposal of income by a non-profit corporation is only applicable to the income from a business that incurs a profit under Article 3 (3) 1 of the Corporate Tax Act, and it does not apply to the income from the disposal of fixed assets under subparagraph 5 of the same Article, and it is illegal to dispose of the income as a bonus even though it does not receive any remuneration from the plaintiff.

3. Related statutes;

Attachment 'Related Acts and subordinate statutes' shall be as shown.

4. Determination

A. According to Article 3(2) of the former Corporate Tax Act (amended by Act No. 8141 of Dec. 30, 2006; hereinafter "former Corporate Tax Act"), income for each business year of a non-profit domestic corporation shall be income generated from manufacturing, construction, wholesale, retail, consumer product repair, real estate, rental, and business services, and from disposal of fixed assets not directly used for the proper purpose business. Article 67 of the former Corporate Tax Act and Article 106 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Corporate Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 19891 of Feb. 28, 2007; hereinafter "former Enforcement Decree of the Corporate Tax Act"), the amount included in the calculation of corporate tax on income for each business year shall be disposed of according to the Presidential Decree, such as bonus, dividends, other outflow, internal reservation, etc., but if a person who has returned to the corporation is an executive or employee, such income shall be disposed of as a disposition to the person to whom it reverts, and shall not be interpreted as 97.5.

B. In full view of the above evidence and evidence Nos. 7-1 and 7-2, the plaintiff did not directly use the real estate of this case for three or more years in medical service, despite the transfer of the real estate of this case to 3,150,000,000 won, the plaintiff was falsely sentenced to the transfer of the real estate of this case to 2,350,000,000 won when the tax base return under the law of the business year 2006 was made, and the amount of 80,000,000,000 won which was under the sentence of the plaintiff's president was leaked to SeoB who was the plaintiff's president; SeoB was recognized to have received 87,690,000 won from the plaintiff's salary for 205, 8,320,000 won from the medical service business for 206, 3,150,000 won, and there were no legal grounds for the defendant's assertion that the income of this case was made under Article 3(1).

5. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.