[부당이득금반환청구사건][고집1976민(3),215]
Whether the legal relation which is subject to taxation, or the taxation that misleads a certain fact, is void as a matter of course.
In a case where a tax is imposed by mistake of a legal relation which is subject to taxation or a certain fact, it cannot be said that the taxation is a grave and apparent defect that the taxation is to be null and void as a matter of course, aside from the fact that the taxation can be revoked.
Article 1 of the Administrative Litigation Act
Supreme Court Decision 73Nu242 delivered on May 14, 1974 (Daad 10754 delivered on May 14, 197; Supreme Court Decision 22Nu3 delivered on June 22, 200; Decision 1(264)17 of the Administrative Litigation Act; Decision 489No7860 delivered on June 27, 1972 (Supreme Court Decision 10240 delivered on June 14, 197; Decision 203Nu5 delivered on June 5, 200; Decision 1(256)176 of the Administrative Litigation Act
Plaintiff
Korea
Daegu District Court (76Gahap24) in the first instance
(1) The appeal is dismissed.
(2) Costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.
The original judgment is revoked. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff the amount equivalent to 2,868,045 won and the amount equivalent to 5% per annum from the day after the delivery of the complaint in this case to the day after the full payment of the complaint in this case. The litigation costs shall be borne by the defendant. The above paragraph (2)
In imposing individual business taxes and business income taxes for the second period of 1973 on the plaintiff, the head of the Dong Daegu District Tax Office, the defendant's agency, has no dispute over the fact that the tax base amount is set at KRW 71,13,00,000 and KRW 1,06,95, and KRW 2,193,127, and KRW 2,00,000,000,000.
However, the plaintiff, as the cause of the claim of this case, did not specify the plaintiff's business place and sold the above tax base amount to the Daegu 3 Highway Corporation's 6th business income tax, and thus, the plaintiff's 6th business income tax base amount to the above 3th business income tax base was determined to be the aggregate of the above 3th business income tax imposed on the plaintiff's 6th business income tax base and the 9th business income tax base amount to the Busan 6th business income tax base to the effect that the plaintiff's 6th business income tax base was not identical to the above 9th business income tax base amount to the above 3th business income tax base. Thus, the plaintiff's 6th business income tax base amount to the above 9th business income tax base amount to the above 3th business income tax base and the 9th business income tax base amount to the above 3th business income tax base, and the plaintiff's 6th business income tax base amount to the above 9th business income tax base to the above 3th business income tax base amount to the above 9th business income tax base amount.
Therefore, since the plaintiff's claim of this case cannot be deemed to be justifiable, it shall be dismissed. Accordingly, the judgment below with the same conclusion is just, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition.
Judges Kim Young-young (Presiding Judge) and Lee Tae-tae Kim