전심절차를 경유하지 아니한 채 제기한 소는 부적법함[각하]
A lawsuit brought without going through the procedure of the previous trial is unlawful.
Article 56 (2) of the Framework Act on National Taxes provides that an administrative litigation on a request for cancellation of disposition may not be filed without going through a request for examination or adjudgment and a decision thereon. Thus, the lawsuit of this case filed without going through a prior trial procedure is illegal.
Article 56 of the Framework Act on National Taxes
2012Guhap3729 Disposition of revocation of Value-Added Tax
Quantity XX
Head of Geumcheon Tax Office
May 25, 2012
June 22, 2012
1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff.
The Defendant’s imposition of value-added tax of KRW 000 on July 13, 2006 and KRW 000 on the aggregate of KRW 1st quarter of 2004 and KRW 000 on the Plaintiff on July 13, 200 shall be revoked.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. The Plaintiff, both A(A) and CB established the PP equipment Co., Ltd. on July 3, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as “non-party corporation”), and both A and B took office as the representative director, the Plaintiff’s director, and the privateB, respectively. However, the non-party corporation did not pay each value-added tax of KRW 000 for the first term of 2004 and KRW 000 for the second term of 2004.
"C. The defendant deemed the plaintiff to be an oligopolistic stockholder of the non-party corporation and designated the plaintiff as the second taxpayer pursuant to Article 39 (1) of the Framework Act on National Taxes (amended by Act No. 7930 of Apr. 28, 2006; hereinafter the same). On July 13, 2006, the plaintiff filed the lawsuit of this case on February 3, 2004 with the notice of payment of value-added tax amount of 00 won (00 won), value-added tax for the first period of 2004 (00 won X40%, and less than won) for the second period of 2004 (hereinafter the "disposition of this case"). The plaintiff was served on July 18, 2006, but did not go through the procedure of the previous trial, and did not go through the procedure of the previous trial.
[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap's statements in Gap's 1, 3 (including virtual numbers), and 8, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Judgment on the Defendant’s defense prior to the merits
With respect to a claim seeking cancellation of the disposition of this case on the ground that the Plaintiff is not an oligopolistic shareholder, the Defendant did not go through the procedure of the preceding trial, and thus, makes a defense prior to the merits unlawful. According to Article 56(2) of the Framework Act on National Taxes, administrative litigation on the claim for cancellation of disposition may not be filed without going through a request for examination or a request for adjudication under this Act and a decision thereon, demanding a necessary prior trial procedure. As long as it is obvious that the Plaintiff brought the lawsuit of this case without going through the procedure of the preceding trial, the lawsuit of this case is unlawful, and therefore, the Defendant’s prior defense
3. Conclusion
Therefore, we decide to dismiss the instant lawsuit, and decide as per Disposition.