1. According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below found that the plaintiff was registered in the register of shareholders as if the plaintiff owned 13,000 shares out of the total number of shares 50,000 shares of the non-party Japan Trade Co., Ltd. and was registered as an auditor since the incorporation of the above company. However, this was registered as above by unlawful use of the plaintiff's seal imprint without the plaintiff's consent or consent while establishing the above company on July 1, 1976. The court below held that the plaintiff's seal imprint affixed the plaintiff's signature and seal imprint due to the plaintiff's failure to attend the minutes of the inaugural general meeting or the minutes of the board of directors of the above company, and the plaintiff's seal imprint affixed with the certificate of incorporation, the certificate of acquisition of shares, the report of establishment of a company, the statement of reduction of period, and the letter of approval of the plaintiff's seal imprint affixed with the above company's seal imprint can be identified as the land, and since the plaintiff cannot be viewed as the shareholder of the above company, the plaintiff, the oligopolistic shareholder of this case.

2. However, even if there is a defect that misleads the factual basis of the taxation disposition, if it is not objectively clear, the taxation disposition can be revoked if it is apparent in its appearance objectively. Thus, in a case where the misunderstanding of the factual basis arises from the erroneous taxation data, if the taxation data lacks appearance and is objectively likely to suspect the establishment or authenticity of its contents, it would be difficult to view the misunderstanding of the factual basis due to the taxation data as an apparent apparent defect objectively unless it is known.

Even if the Plaintiff is not a shareholder of the above non-party company, as at the time of the original adjudication, even if the Plaintiff was not a shareholder of the above non-party company, even if the company was established on July 1, 1976, and until the time of the pertinent taxation disposition, the register of shareholders was registered as an auditor, and other documents for keeping the company also have been registered as a shareholder or auditor, even if the above list of shareholders, etc. lack of external appearance and lack of objective doubt as to objectively forgery or false documents, it is difficult to view that such mistake of facts is objectively obvious in external appearance even if the Defendant misleads the Plaintiff as a shareholder of the above company based on each of the above taxation data. In other words, the circumstances cited by the lower court, namely, the Plaintiff’s seal impression is different from the seal imprint of the board of directors’ meeting minutes or minutes, and the Plaintiff’s seal imprint affixed on the documents for keeping the company is also distinguishable from the seal imprint of the company, and it cannot be said that the above mistake

Ultimately, even if there is a defect in the instant taxation disposition, even if the Plaintiff was erroneous as the oligopolistic shareholder of the above non-party company, it is not clear that it is, and thus, it cannot be deemed as abrupt invalidation, the lower court determined otherwise by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the invalidation of administrative disposition, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment, and thus, cannot be maintained.

3. Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the court below. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Lee Lee Sung-soo (Presiding Justice)