[대지공매처분취소][집19(1)행,020]
(a) In case where the chief of a tax office issues a public auction notification of the attached property pursuant to Article 76 of the National Tax Collection Act, the notification of the public auction given to the defaulted
(b) The case holding that the head of a tax office, on the ground that a corporate delinquent taxpayer did not report the change of its representative in the commercial register pursuant to Article 60 (3) of the Corporate Tax Act, shall be deemed to have been cured of the defect in the notice of public sale in the name of the former representative and the notice of the public sale.
A. At the same time, notice of a public auction given by the head of a tax office under Article 76 of the former National Tax Collection Act (Act No. 819 of Dec. 8, 61) and notice of a public auction given to a delinquent taxpayer is not a requirement for the public auction, but merely inform the delinquent taxpayer of the fact of the public auction itself, and the name of the representative is not stated in the registration of the real estate acquisition of the juristic person's real estate. Therefore, if the delinquent taxpayer who is a juristic person notifies the public auction under the former name of the reason that the change of representative was made in the commercial registry but the head of
B. Even if the notice of public auction was sent in front of the previous representative who had already been changed and again refused to receive it, it was wrong for the plaintiff company to postpone the public auction in the process of the public auction, and if the defendant delayed the date of the public auction in this case and notified it again to the company, it is reasonable to view that the defect in the notice of the public auction was cured.
Article 76 of the National Tax Collection Act
Central Coal Corporation
head of Sung Dong Tax Office
Intervenor joining the Defendant
Seoul High Court Decision 69Gu365 delivered on November 24, 1970
The original judgment shall be reversed, and
The case is remanded to Seoul High Court.
The grounds of appeal by the respective agents of the Defendant and the Intervenor are as follows:
The court below found the plaintiff company's non-party 1's notification of the public auction to the non-party 1's representative director of the non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 2's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 6's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 6's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 6's non-party 1's non-party 6's non-party 6's non-party 6's non-party 6's non-party 6's non-party 6's non-party 6's non-party 6's non-party 6's non-party 6's non-party 6's non-party 6's non-party 1's non-party 6's non-party 6's non-party 6's non-party 6's non-party 1's non-party.
It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.
Supreme Court Judges Kim Young-chul (Presiding Judge) (Presiding Justice) Mag-gim Kim, Kim Jong-dae and Yang-Namng