Whether necessary expenses are recognized

In the second instance of a related criminal case, the lower court erred by denying the Plaintiff’s assertion that additional necessary expenses are incurred, as it recognized the fact that the amount was additionally recognized as necessary expenses and deducted from the Plaintiff’s revenue, in addition to the necessary expenses.

Article 27 (Calculation of Necessary Expenses)

The part of the lower judgment against the Plaintiff is reversed, and that part of the case is remanded to the Seoul High Court.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

1. As to the provision of external advertisement services

In citing the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, the court below determined that the advertising business operator (the so-called "so-called franchise") who provided the plaintiff with the advertising service should enter into an advertising service contract with the plaintiff who was granted exclusive rights to the outside of the ○○ city bus by the ○○ newspaper company (hereinafter referred to as the "○○ newspaper company") and should be deemed to have engaged in advertising orders and activities for the plaintiff, and it cannot be deemed that the advertising business operator provided the plaintiff with the advertising service directly to the ○○ newspaper company.

In light of relevant legal principles and records, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is no violation of the rules of evidence or misapprehension of legal principles as otherwise alleged in the grounds of appeal.

2. Regarding the basis book of the instant disposition

The lower court, citing the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, determined that there is more credibility than an electronic book recording book in relation to the authenticity of the contents contained therein.

In light of the records, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is no violation of the rules of evidence as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

3. As to the provision of internal advertising services

원심은 제1심 판결의 이유를 인용하여, 원고의 시내버스 내부광고 수입금액 중 △△△의 1,363,635원, □□□□의 3,409,091원, XXXX의 2,727,273원의 각 광고용역대금을 1996년 귀속 수입으로 산정함이 타당하다고 판단하였다.

In light of relevant legal principles and records, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is no violation of the rules of evidence or misapprehension of legal principles as otherwise alleged in the grounds of appeal.

4. As to the supplementary recognition of necessary expenses

citing the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, the lower court recognized only KRW 89,758,529 [1] [20,780,684 (part on tax invoices)] 88,780,684] 179,614,895 [2] 178,206, 30, 960, 206, 30, 964, 206, 30, 97, 206, 30, 97, 197, 196, 206, 196, 206, 30, 196, 196, 206, 30, 196, 196, 306, 196, 196, 306, 196, 300, 196, 197, 297, 200

However, in light of the records, the Plaintiff’s assertion was recognized as necessary expense expense of KRW 562,60,916, as well as KRW 529,68,916, which was deemed necessary expense by the second instance court related to the disposition of the instant case; KRW 25,716,86, which is deemed necessary expense expense of KRW 529,783; KRW 36,90,00 and KRW 92,00 which were already included in necessary expense at the time of the disposition of the instant case; KRW 374,764,897, which was deducted from KRW 977,97,00, KRW 196, KRW 197, KRW 279, KRW 2796, KRW 97, KRW 275, and KRW 97, KRW 367,00, KRW 300,00, KRW 9767, also the lower court determined as necessary expense expense of the instant case.

Ultimately, the court below did not decide on the remaining grounds of appeal as to this part, but did not err in the misapprehension of the legal principles as to the plaintiff's additional necessary expenses, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

The ground of appeal pointing this out is with merit.

5. As to the inclusion of entertainment expenses in necessary expenses

citing the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, the court below determined that the activity items stated in the record book of the court of first instance are considered expenses with the nature of entertainment expenses, and thus, they do not include necessary expenses such as travel expenses, transportation expenses, and media management expenses

In light of the records, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is no violation of the rules of evidence as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

6. As to the estimated determination of income amount

citing the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance court, the lower court determined that it is difficult to view that the Plaintiff’s amount of income cannot be calculated based on books or other documentary evidence, which are the requirements for estimated taxation, as it is possible to deduct the necessary expenses additionally recognized from the amount of income recognized to be additionally included in the total amount of global income tax reported for the year 1996 through 1999, which is the amount of global income tax reported for the year 199 and the amount of income for the year

In light of relevant legal principles and records, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is no error of law such as violation of the rules of evidence and misapprehension of legal principles as to the estimation of income amount, as otherwise alleged in the grounds of appeal.

7. Conclusion

Therefore, the part of the judgment below against the plaintiff is reversed and remanded to the court below. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.