{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris","provider_url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/","author_name":"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris","author_url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/","title":"KKO 2223\/2017 - Oikeudenk\u00e4yntimenettely","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"YTuCjlwrlo\"><a href=\"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/kko-2223-2017-oikeudenkayntimenettely-2\/\">KKO 2223\/2017 &#8212; Oikeudenk\u00e4yntimenettely<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/kko-2223-2017-oikeudenkayntimenettely-2\/embed\/#?secret=YTuCjlwrlo\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"\u00abKKO 2223\/2017 &#8212; Oikeudenk\u00e4yntimenettely\u00bb &#8212; Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris\" data-secret=\"YTuCjlwrlo\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n\/\/# sourceURL=https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/wp-includes\/js\/wp-embed.min.js\n<\/script>\n","description":"K\u00e4r\u00e4j\u00e4oikeus oli vuonna 2016 vahvistanut p\u00e4iv\u00e4sakon raham\u00e4\u00e4r\u00e4n k\u00e4ytt\u00e4en kuukausitulon laskemisen perusteena vuoden 2014 verotustietoja. Vastaaja oli valituksessaan hovioikeudelle vedonnut siihen, ett\u00e4 h\u00e4nen yritystoimintansa rakenteessa oli vuonna 2015 tapahtunut muutos, mik\u00e4 oli aiheuttanut h\u00e4nen tuloissaan olennaisen muutoksen. Korkeimman oikeuden p\u00e4\u00e4t\u00f6ksest\u00e4 ilmenevill\u00e4 perusteilla katsottiin, ett\u00e4 hovioikeuden olisi tullut my\u00f6nt\u00e4\u00e4 jatkok\u00e4sittelylupa muutosperusteella. OK 25 a luku 11 \u00a7..."}