실제 대표자가 아닌 명의상 법인 대표자에게 한 소득처분은 부당함[각하]
Gwangju High Court-2014-Nu-6608 ( October 23, 2015)
The early trial 2013 Mine2982
Income disposition made to the representative of a corporation in the name other than the actual representative is unreasonable;
Since the representative director of a company was registered only in the form of corporate register and cannot be deemed to have actually operated the company, it is unlawful to impose the comprehensive income tax by deeming the representative as the representative director of the company in the form of form.
Article 106 (1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Corporate Tax Act
2015du41241 Global income and revocation of disposition
literatureA
00. Head of tax office
Gwangju High Court Decision 2014Nu6608 Decided March 26, 2015
July 23, 2015
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked, and the lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.
All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant.
The grounds of appeal are examined.
When an administrative disposition is revoked, such disposition shall lose its validity and no longer exists, and a revocation lawsuit against a non-existent administrative disposition is unlawful as there is no benefit of lawsuit (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Du18202, Dec. 13, 2012).
According to the records, the defendant can be aware of the fact that he voluntarily revoked the disposition of this case on April 27, 2015, which was after filing the appeal of this case. Thus, the lawsuit of this case is already extinguished and seeks revocation of the disposition that is not yet extinguished, and thus, the lawsuit of this case was unlawful as
Therefore, the judgment of the court below shall be reversed, and since this case is sufficient for the court to directly judge, the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked, and the lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed, and the total cost of the lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant pursuant to Article 32 of the Administrative Litigation Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent