압류등기말소 청구의 소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. The summary and judgment of the plaintiff's assertion that since five years have passed since the defendant's disposition on default against the plaintiff, the plaintiff asserts that the tax amount in arrears under tax law should be disposed of and the seizure stated in the claim should be released, and that the defendant still seeks cancellation as it maintains the seizure
However, as the Framework Act on National Taxes was amended by Act No. 5189, Dec. 30, 1996; “Disposition on Deficits” was excluded from the grounds for extinguishment of tax liability; the National Tax Collection Act was amended by Act No. 6053, Dec. 28, 1999; and the grounds for revocation of the disposition on deficits were expanded to “when another property that can be seized is discovered” and thus, the disposition on deficits only means the termination of the procedure for disposition on deficits; rather, the procedure for disposition on deficits is not extinguished in itself and the revocation of the disposition on deficits is less than that of administrative procedures (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Du2527, Mar. 24, 2011). Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s assertion on the premise that the disposition on deficits became extinct due to the amendment of the Act is applied.
2. Conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit.