이 사건 부과처분은 공무원의 직부상 의무위반과 상관관계가 없음[국승]
Daejeon District Court 2015Na103591 ( October 20, 2015)
The instant disposition does not have a correlation with a public official’s breach of duty of direct injury.
The damage claimed by the Plaintiff is not a disposition due to occupational negligence not caused by a public official’s failure to inform another person of his/her business registration and to recommend the closure of business, but a disposition imposed on the Plaintiff because the Plaintiff did not pay the tax to him/her while continuing to operate the gas station under his/her own name. Therefore, it is difficult to view that there
Article 5 of the former Value-Added Tax Act
Supreme Court Decision 2015Da247936
BB
CCC
National Rotations
February 12, 2016
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.
As the petition of appeal filed by the Plaintiff did not state the grounds of appeal and did not submit the appellate brief within the statutory period, it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices, pursuant to Article 429 of the Civil Procedure Act and Article 5 of the Act on Special Cases concerning