[종합소득세등부과처분취소][공1992.3.15.(916),944]
The case reversing the judgment of the court below which dismissed without examining whether there was a request for correction of the Director of the National Tax Tribunal for the correction period, and the period for correction was imposed, and there was an error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the period for decision of the National Tax Tribunal or incomplete hearing.
The case reversing the judgment of the court below which dismissed the judgment of the court below on the ground that there was an error of law such as misunderstanding of legal principles as to the period for decision-making or matters to be examined by the Director of the National Tax Tribunal, or misunderstanding of legal principles as to the period for decision-making by the Director of the National Tax Tribunal or matters to be examined ex officio, since there was a kind of request for correction by the Director of the National Tax Tribunal was bound in the records.
Articles 81, 63(1), and 65(4) of the Framework Act on National Taxes; Articles 20(1) and 26 of the Administrative Litigation Act
[Plaintiff-Appellant] Plaintiff 1 and 1 other (Law Firm Gyeong, Attorneys Lee Dong-young et al., Counsel for plaintiff-appellant)
Plaintiff
The director of Gwangju Tax Office
Gwangju High Court Decision 90Gu1396 delivered on September 13, 1991
The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Gwangju High Court.
According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, the plaintiff filed an appeal against the taxation disposition of this case with the National Tax Tribunal on February 12, 1990. The Director of the National Tax Tribunal decided to dismiss the appeal on June 11, 1990, which is the 90th day after the above request was passed until May 13, 1990, and received the notification. The plaintiff filed the lawsuit of this case on August 10, 1990. Thus, before the plaintiff received the notice of dismissal of the decision of this case, the decision of dismissal of the National Tax Tribunal under Articles 81 and 65(2) of the Framework Act on National Taxes and the 90-day period from the date of the request for the appeal as the 90-day period from May 13, 1990, which is the 90-day period from the date of the above decision of dismissal to the 190-day period from May 14, 1990 to the date of the above decision of dismissal.
However, according to the provisions of Articles 81, 63(1), and 65(4) of the Framework Act on National Taxes, the Director of the National Tax Tribunal may request the correction of the contents and procedures of the request for adjudgment by fixing a considerable period, and the correction period shall not be included in the decision period. Thus, the decision period for the request for adjudgment cannot be deemed to have expired immediately since the lapse of 90 days from the date of the request for national tax adjudication if the request for correction is made. In this case, according to the records of this case, the records of this case are compiled (see, e.g., records) the data which the Director of the National Tax Tribunal of the National Tax Tribunal of Korea has received a request for correction under the provisions of Articles 81, 63(1), and 65(4) of the Framework Act on National Taxes. After examining ex officio whether the request for correction under the provisions of the Director of the National Tax Tribunal of the National Tax Tribunal of the National
Therefore, the court below's decision that the plaintiff's lawsuit of this case is unlawful is erroneous, and there is an error of law by misunderstanding the legal principles as to the decision period of decision of the Director of the National Tax Tribunal or failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations as to ex officio investigation
Therefore, the judgment 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 Kim Jong-soo (Presiding Justice)