beta
(영문) 서울고등법원 2012. 02. 22. 선고 2011누33893 판결

제3자의 재산을 대상으로 한 압류처분은 당연무효에 해당함[국패]

Case Number of the immediately preceding lawsuit

Suwon District Court 201Guhap971, 2018.30

Case Number of the previous trial

early 2010 Heavy2528 ( December 03, 2010)

Title

Disposition of seizure against a third party's property shall be null and void as a matter of course.

Summary

(1) If a truster transfers the ownership of real estate to a trustee and a trust relationship is established pursuant to the Trust Act between the parties, the trust property shall belong to the trustee, unlike a simple title trust, and since it cannot be deemed the truster’s property after the trust is held, the truster’s tax claim against the truster cannot be seized on the trust property under the name of the trustee

Related statutes

Article 24 of the National Tax Collection Act

Cases

2011Nu33893 Nullification, etc. of attachment disposition

Plaintiff, Appellant

XX Co., Ltd

Defendant, appellant and appellant

Head of the High Tax Office

Judgment of the first instance court

Suwon District Court Decision 2011Guhap971 Decided August 30, 2011

Conclusion of Pleadings

December 21, 2011

Imposition of Judgment

February 22, 2012

Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1. Purport of claim

On May 1, 2010, the attachment disposition taken by the Defendant on May 1, 2010 on the claims listed in the separate sheet is invalid. Preliminaryly, the attachment disposition taken by the Defendant on May 1, 2010 on the claims listed in the separate sheet shall be revoked.

2. Purport of appeal

The judgment of the first instance is revoked. The plaintiff's main claim and the conjunctive claim are all dismissed.

Reasons

The reasoning of this court's judgment is the same as that of the court of first instance, and thus, it is cited in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure

The judgment of the first instance is justifiable. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.