원고의 청구는 존재하지 않는 처분의 취소를 구하는 것으로서 부적법함.[각하]
The plaintiff's claim is illegal to seek the revocation of the non-existent disposition.
The evidence presented by the plaintiff alone cannot be recognized that the plaintiff filed a request for correction of capital gains tax against the defendant or that the defendant rejected the plaintiff's request for correction of capital gains tax, so the plaintiff's request is unlawful as it seeks
2013Guhap2158 Correction of capital gains tax, etc.
KimA
○ Head of tax office
May 30, 2014
July 18, 2014
1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Cheong-gu Office
The defendant's rejection disposition of correction of capital gains tax against the plaintiff on May 29, 2013 is revoked.
1. Basic facts
"A. The plaintiff purchased three parcels of land (hereinafter "the land in this case") on October 19, 2001 at OO-dong OO-dong O-dong O-dong O-dong O-dong O-dong O-dong 676-30, 676-30, and 676-14, but sold it to this B on June 20, 2002, and reported its transfer value as OO-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O by April 30, 20.
C. The Plaintiff appealed and filed an objection against the Defendant on April 30, 2013, but the Defendant dismissed the objection on May 29, 2013.
[Grounds for Recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 and 2 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the lawsuit in this case is lawful
ex officio, we examine the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit.
“The Plaintiff’s disposition of imposition of KRW 00 and KRW 00 of the transfer income tax for the taxable year 2002, upon which the Defendant notified the claimant of the determination on April 30, 2013, stated that the tax base was corrected as O0,” and changed the purport of the claim on December 24, 2013 to that “a disposition of rejection of the Plaintiff’s request for correction of transfer income tax that was made on May 29, 2013,” which was later ordered by the court to specify the Plaintiff’s request for revocation on March 21, 2014, the first date for pleading, but the Plaintiff did not comply with this. However, the evidence presented by the Plaintiff alone that the Plaintiff filed a request for correction of transfer income tax against the Defendant, or that the Defendant rejected the Plaintiff’s request for revocation of the disposition on May 29, 2013, by asserting that the Plaintiff’s request for revocation of the disposition was unlawful, or that the Plaintiff sought revocation of the Plaintiff’s request for revocation of the disposition on May 29, 2013.
Therefore, since the lawsuit of this case is unlawful, it is decided to dismiss it. It is so decided as per Disposition.