양도소득세부과처분취소
1. All of the lawsuits for retrial of this case shall be dismissed.
2. The costs of retrial shall be borne by the plaintiff.
1. The following facts, which have become final and conclusive in the judgment subject to review, are apparent or apparent to this court.
On June 22, 2010, the Plaintiff filed a claim against the Plaintiff for revocation of the disposition of imposition of KRW 13,783,580 of the capital gains tax for the year 2007, which was reverted to the Plaintiff on October 5, 2009 (hereinafter “instant disposition of imposition”), but the said court rendered a judgment of the first instance that dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim on October 14, 201.
B. On November 3, 2011, the Plaintiff appealed as Seoul High Court 2011Nu39426, and the said court also rendered a judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s appeal on June 8, 2012.
C. Accordingly, the Plaintiff appealed by Supreme Court Decision 2012Du15708 Decided July 11, 2012. However, the Supreme Court dismissed the Plaintiff’s appeal on October 25, 2012 due to the continuous trial pursuant to Articles 4 and 5 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure for Appeal. The foregoing judgment became final and conclusive by serving the Plaintiff on November 1, 2012.
However, on November 26, 2012, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking the revocation, etc. of the said judgment under the Seoul High Court 201Nu271 on the ground that the Seoul High Court Decision 2011Nu39426, omitted judgment on the Plaintiff’s assertion. This constitutes grounds for retrial on the ground that it constitutes grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)9 of the Civil Procedure Act.
E. However, the Seoul High Court rendered a judgment dismissing the lawsuit on May 2, 2013, to the effect that, as the Plaintiff, which had already asserted the same cause by an appeal, could not file a petition for retrial on the grounds of omission of judgment, the said petition for retrial was unlawful.
However, on May 20, 2013, the Plaintiff appealed as the Supreme Court Decision 2013Du10236 Decided May 20, 2013. The Supreme Court dismissed the Plaintiff’s appeal on August 23, 2013 due to the delay of hearing in accordance with Articles 4 and 5 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure of Appeal.