부과처분을 직권취소하였으므로 각하함[각하]
Seocho 2013west 149 (No. 30, 2013)
Since the disposition of imposition was revoked ex officio, it shall be dismissed.
The disposition is not in existence after ex officio revocation of the disposition, and the revocation lawsuit against non-existent administrative disposition is illegal as there is no interest in the lawsuit.
Article 99-3 of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act / [Special Taxation for Capital Gains Tax for Purchasers of Newly-built Houses
2013Gudan56174 Revocation of Disposition of Imposing capital gains tax
The AA
Head of Seocho Tax Office
February 5, 2015
February 12, 2015
1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.
2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.
Cheong-gu Office
The defendant revoked the disposition of imposition of the capital gains tax OOO for the year 2006 against the plaintiff on April 10, 2012.
If an administrative disposition is revoked, the disposition becomes null and void, and no longer exists, and a lawsuit seeking revocation against a non-existent administrative disposition is unlawful as there is no benefit of lawsuit (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Du5317, Sept. 28, 2006). However, the fact that the Defendant revoked ex officio the disposition imposing capital gains tax stated in the purport of the Plaintiff’s claim seeking revocation on January 7, 2015 while the lawsuit is pending is apparent by the purport of the evidence No. 2 and the entire pleadings. Therefore, the lawsuit in this case becomes null and void as it does not have a benefit of lawsuit.
The litigation of this case shall be dismissed, and the litigation costs shall be borne by the defendant pursuant to Article 32 of the Administrative Litigation Act.