체납처분에 의한 압류가 있는 경우 체납액을 한도로 체납자인 채권자를 대위하여 추심권을 행사하는 것임[국승]
If attachment is made by the disposition on default, the collection right is exercised by subrogation of the creditor who is the defaulted taxpayer within the amount in arrears.
Where a seizure is made by the disposition on default based on a tax claim finalized under the National Tax Collection Act, not only the national taxes specified in the notice of attachment of claims in subrogation of creditors who are delinquent to the extent of the amount in arrears, but also the additional dues and increased additional dues added after the attachment of claims
Article 41 (Procedures for Attachment of Claims)
Article 45 of the Enforcement Decree of the National Tax Collection Act: Procedures for Default
Gwangju District Court 2018Gahap50494 Collection
Korea
AA
Pleadings without Oral Proceedings
June 29, 2018
1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 1,407,942,80 won with 15% interest per annum from February 9, 2018 to the day of full payment.
2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.
3. Paragraph 1 above may be provisionally executed.
Cheong-gu Office
The same shall apply to the order.
1. Indication of claim;
The reasons for the attached Form shall be as shown in the attached Form.
2. Applicable provisions of Acts: Article 208 (3) 1 of the Civil Procedure Act;
Cheongwon of the Gu
1. Claims for preservation;
Tax claims against the Plaintiff’s non-party limited liability company ○○ are as follows:
< by Presidential Decree No. 2134, Oct. 16, 2017> A person shall have the right to preserve (tax claim) against the non-party limited liability company.
Jurisdiction
Tax Offices
Items of Taxation
Reversion
Deadline for payment
Notice Tax Amount
Current arrears
Jinay
○
Tax Offices
Value-added Tax
2015.2
December 31, 2015
159,338,420
151,957,570
A No. 1
(Inquiry in absence of arrears)
Business Income Tax
October 2015
2016.028
2,765,890
3,479,460
Wage and salary income tax (A)
September 2015
2016.028
1,120,660
1,409,620
Wage and salary income tax (A)
August 2015
2016.028
1,131,260
1,423,010
Business Income Tax
November 2015
16.03.31
3,736,00
4,655,010
Wage and salary income tax (A)
October 2015
16.03.31
1,041,410
1,297,460
Value-added Tax
2015.2
oly 2016.15
138,919,00
171,425,900
Business Income Tax
December 2015
oly 2016.15
23,400
24,100
Wage and salary income tax (A)
November 2015
oly 2016.15
1,126,210
1,389,650
Wage and salary income tax (A)
December 2015
oly 2016.15
1,126,210
1,389,650
Wage and salary income tax (A)
January 2016
oly 2016.15
1,056,670
1,291,100
Corporate Tax
2015 Business year
2016.05.31
424,348,790
518,554,120
Business Income Tax
February 2016
2016.05.31
3,578,000
4,372,210
Wage and salary income tax (A)
February 2016
2016.05.31
1,295,460
1,582,950
Corporate Tax
2015 Business year
16.06.30
424,096,590
513,156,730
Wage and salary income tax (A)
March 2016
oly 2016.15
1,057,580
1,266,950
Wage and salary income tax (A)
April 2016
2016.31
1,056,970
1,266,180
Wage and salary income tax (A)
May 2016
208.31
1,056,360
1,252,760
Wage and salary income tax (A)
6.6
2016.30
1,057,580
1,241,580
Wage and salary income tax (A)
July 2016
oly 31, 2016
1,057,270
1,228,460
Wage and salary income tax (A)
August 2016
November 30, 2016
1,055,460
1,213,720
Value-added Tax
2016.1
December 31, 2016
19,210,120
21,861,100
Wage and salary income tax (A)
September 2016
December 31, 2016
1,057,580
1,203,510
Total
1,407,942,800
(unit: Won)
On November 27, 2014, the head of the ○○ Tax Office under the Plaintiff-affiliated tax office started business from ○○○○-gu, ○○○○○-gu, ○○○○○○-gu, ○○○○○ on real estate sales agency on June 30, 2016, notified Nonparty-based limited liability company ○○○○ of the value-added tax amounting to KRW 159,338,420 on December 31, 2015 and KRW 22 national taxes on December 31, 2015. However, Nonparty-based limited liability company ○○ did not pay taxes until the date of filing the lawsuit, and thus, did not pay taxes to KRW 1,407,942,80, as shown in Table 1 (see subparagraph
2. Sales claim against the Defendant by the non-party limited liability company ○○
1) The receipt of the sales agency fee from the non-party limited liability company ○○ for the Defendant
Table 2> Details of issuance of tax invoices to the Defendant by ○○○○ Company other than the Sub-Party 2.
Projects
Year
E =
Value of Supply
Suppliers
(Business Number)
person receiving the supply
(Business Number)
non-higher
2015
2015.1
4,501,818,225
(Foreign) Limited Liability Company 00
(Defendant)
A No. 2-1 Evidence
2015.2
4,869,545,497
Sub-committees
9,371,363,722
2016
2016.1
659,090,900
Total value of supply
10,030,454,622
(unit: Won)
During the business management period (from November 27, 2014 to June 30, 2016), the non-party limited liability company ○○ was engaged in the apartment sales agency business of BB operated by the defendant AA as the sales agency. The above attached Table 2 < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 2590, Dec. 27, 2014>
2) Confirmation of sales claim against the Defendant by Nonparty ○○○ Company
As of December 31, 2016, it was confirmed that there was a sales claim of KRW 4,319,000,000 against the defendant as of December 31, 2016, according to the account of credit account of "Standard Balance Sheet" attached at the time of submitting a statement of tax base and tax amount of corporate tax for the business year 2016 on March 30, 2017, and the statement of foreign sales amount submitted on August 22, 2017, and as of December 31, 2016, it was confirmed that there was a financial claim of KRW 4,319,00,000 against the defendant. As a result of the review of the details of the financial transaction reply at the ○○○ ○○○○○○ branch upon the request for the financial transaction information to the non-party limited liability company, the defendant paid the sales claim to the non-party limited liability company
3) As above, the non-party limited liability company ○ has sales claim of KRW 4,319,00,000 against the defendant as of the date of lawsuit.
3. Seizure of claims;
Pursuant to Article 41(1) of the National Tax Collection Act of June 2, 2017, the head of ○○ Tax Office under the Plaintiff’s control of the Plaintiff attached the claims against the Defendant by subrogation of the non-party delinquent taxpayer limited liability company, and served a notice of attachment of claims on June 16, 2017, and served a written request for collection on June 29, 2017 (see evidence 3-1 through 3-2).
4. Demand and refusal to collect seized claims;
The plaintiff, upon the defendant's refusal to comply with the request for collection, served a peremptory notice to the defendant on July 5, 2017 pursuant to the provisions of Article 45 (2) of the Enforcement Decree of the National Tax Collection Act, but the defendant rejected this (see evidence A 4).
5. The ground for the plaintiff's claim
1) Legal grounds
Article 41 (2) of the National Tax Collection Act provides that the State shall subrogate a creditor who is a delinquent taxpayer within the amount in arrears, and Article 35 (3) of the Framework Act on National Taxes shall be collected in preference to other public charges and claims. Article 45 of the Enforcement Decree of the National Tax Collection Act provides that if the debtor whose obligation is seized fails to fulfill even after the lapse of the time limit for performance of the obligation, he/she shall file a lawsuit against the debtor in subrogation of the creditor who is the delinquent
2) Relevant precedents
Where a seizure is made based on a tax claim finalized under the National Tax Collection Act, the State acquires the right to collect the seized claim when the effect of seizure takes place (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 94Da2886, Jun. 24, 1994). If a national tax in arrears claims have been seized, the obligee or pledgee of the defaulted taxpayer shall lose the right to file a lawsuit seeking payment of the attached claim and pay it to tax officials solely (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 87Da2931, Jan. 17, 1989; 87Da2931, Oct. 16, 1998; 98Na5678, Oct. 16, 1998);
In addition, Article 41 (2) of the National Tax Collection Act provides that the scope of the exercise of the right to collect shall be subrogated to the obligee who is a delinquent taxpayer within the amount of delinquent local taxes, so the scope of the exercise of the right to collect additional dues and increased additional dues which are naturally added pursuant to the legal provisions after the seizure of claims is completed (no additional seizure is available) as well as the relevant secured national taxes (such as principal, additional dues, and increased additional dues) stated in the notice of seizure of claims (see Supreme Court Decision 2004Da6494, Mar. 10, 2005
6. Conclusion
As above, the defendant did not perform his obligation to pay the claims attached by the head of ○○ Tax Office under the plaintiff's control but did not perform it as of the date of the lawsuit, and the plaintiff was forced to file the lawsuit of this case for the defendant to receive repayment of the seized
1) Procedures for seizing claims under Article 41 of the National Tax Collection Act
(1) In seizing claims, the head of a tax office shall notify it to the obligor of the relevant claim (hereinafter referred to as the "third obligor").
(2) Upon notification as referred to in paragraph (1), the head of a tax office shall subrogate the obligee who is a delinquent taxpayer within the amount in arrears.
2) Procedures pursuant to Article 45 of the Enforcement Decree of the National Tax Collection Act
(1) The head of the tax office shall give a peremptory notice where a debtor in receipt of a notice of attachment of claims under Article 41 (1) of the Act fails to repay the claims even after the due date for
(2) Where a debtor in receipt of a peremptory notice under paragraph (1) fails to perform his/her obligation by the peremptory deadline, the head of a tax office shall file a lawsuit on behalf of the creditor against the debtor: Provided, That he/she may release the seizure of claims where he/she deems that there is no financial capability for the performance
3) Priority of Article 35 of the Framework Act on National Taxes
(1) National taxes, surcharges, or expenses for disposition on default shall be collected in preference to other public charges or claims: Provided, That this shall not apply to any of the following public charges or other claims: