국민건강보험료 부과처분 취소
1. Each of the plaintiffs' primary claims and the preliminary claims added at the trial shall be dismissed.
2...
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On December 1, 2005, the defendant deemed that all of the plaintiffs (in relation to the plaintiff A, B, net C, or a factual presentation, the above three persons are referred to, and in relation to the allegations, the identity of the plaintiff as an individual health insurance policyholder for the plaintiff A and the deceased as of March 1, 2012, the notary public is the representative of the Dhap Law Office (hereinafter "the workplace of this case"), and made a disposition against the plaintiff A and the deceased as of March 1, 2012.
B. On June 20, 2014, the Plaintiffs notified the Defendant of the total remuneration amounting to KRW 40,645,974 in 2013 and the total remuneration amounting to KRW 41,877,670 in 2013 in relation to the income accrued at the instant place of business. As to the instant place of business on July 21, 2014, the Defendant issued a disposition imposing KRW 1,282,680 in 1,282,680, and KRW 1,396,060 in 1,961,420 in 200 (hereinafter “instant disposition imposing the instant settled premium”).
C. On August 8, 2014, the Plaintiffs filed an objection with the Health Insurance Objection Committee against the imposition of the instant insurance premium. However, the Health Insurance Objection Committee dismissed the objection on October 13, 2014.
As the net C died on July 6, 2016 during the instant lawsuit, the Plaintiff I, J, K, L, M, and N, the heir of the instant lawsuit, took over the lawsuit.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 10, 12, 13 and 14, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The assertion and judgment
A. Since the notary public who asserted the nature of the workplace of this case and the status of the plaintiffs in this case is a partnership under the Civil Act established to handle notarial affairs, the business owner of the workplace can not be the plaintiffs who are merely a notary public who is an individual partner of the partnership, such as law firm or general cooperative, and a notary public who is an individual member of the partnership cannot be the business owner.
. The above.