2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

A. Claim on the principal portion of acquisition tax

(1) First, in the event that a claim for issuance of the acquisition tax in arrears is exercised as in the auction procedure as in the instant case, the statutory due date which serves as the basis for assessing the margin of secured claims of local tax claims and collateral security claims shall be determined by Article 120(1) of the Local Tax Act that the person who acquired the object of taxation of the acquisition tax must file a return thereon within 30 days from the date of its acquisition and pay the reported tax amount at the same time. In light of the fact that the acquisition tax in arrears is collected by the method of tax payment notice in accordance with Article 121(2)3(a) of the Local Tax Act, rather than the date of filing the acquisition tax return under Article 31(2)3(b) of the Local Tax Act, it shall be deemed as the date of sending the tax notice or the date of delivering the tax notice under Article 31(2)3(a) of the former Local Tax Act (amended by Act No. 4415, Dec. 14, 191; hereinafter referred to as the former Local Tax Act).

However, acquisition tax is a tax on the method of tax return (Article 115 of the Local Tax Act) and is a tax on such type of tax (Article 115 of the Local Tax Act), and as a matter of principle, tax liability is specifically determined by the person liable for tax payment by fixing the tax base and amount of tax and the act of payment is the performance of specific tax obligation confirmed by the report. Thus, in the event that acquisition tax is collected from the successful bid price as a result of an auction for each real estate of this case which is the object of the right to collateral security acquired by the plaintiff, when determining the priority of the acquisition tax claim and secured claim, a former soldier who is the person liable for tax payment of each of the real estate of this case must report the tax base and amount of tax on acquisition tax to the tax authority, and even if he did not pay acquisition tax at the same time, it does not appear that the date of reporting acquisition tax should be the statutory due date by applying Article 31 (2) 3 (a) of the Local Tax Act (see Supreme Court Decision 98Da54298, Jan. 26, 199).

(2) According to Article 31(2)3(a) of the Local Tax Act, the Plaintiff asserts that, as in the instant case, the statutory due date for the acquisition tax of KRW 4,773,780, which was distributed to the Defendant, is a statutory due date for each of the instant real estate owners pursuant to Article 31(2)3(a) of the Local Tax Act, if it is deemed that September 24, 1997, when the statutory due date and the date of establishment of collateral security rights are the same, it is difficult to recognize the legitimacy of giving priority to local tax claims even in cases where the statutory due date and the date of establishment of collateral security

However, Article 31(1) of the Local Tax Act provides that acquisition tax shall be collected in preference to other public charges and other claims. In principle, local tax claims shall take precedence over other claims arising from private legal relations. However, in light of the aforementioned legal system and contents, it is difficult to deem that mortgage claims are established on the statutory due date of the local tax as an exception to the principle of local tax priority. Thus, if acquisition tax is established on the statutory due date of the local tax as alleged by the Plaintiff, it is interpreted that the aforementioned legal system should be equally treated as mortgage claims and the secured claims of the local tax on the statutory due date of the local tax, and that if acquisition tax is established on the statutory due date of the local tax, it is difficult to interpret that the tax base and the secured claims of the local tax should be registered on the statutory due date of the local tax, but there is no basis for distributing dividends by equally treating the secured claims of the local tax before the reporting date of the local tax on the statutory due date, and that if acquisition tax is established on the statutory due date of the reporting date of acquisition tax, it is difficult to establish the legal relationship with the above statutory due date.

Therefore, the distribution schedule prepared by the above court on December 8, 1999 with respect to the auction case of real estate rent as set forth in the Seoul District Court Western Branch Decision 99Y3439 shall be reduced to 5,501,030 won from 7,924,400 won to 7,501,500 won from 924,400 won to 91,350 won from 91,512,020 won from 198,664,100 won from 198,664,100 won to 201,087,47,470 won from 199. Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case shall be accepted within the above scope of recognition, and the remaining claim shall be dismissed for this reason, and the judgment of the court below is justifiable, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the plaintiff.

Judges Man-soon (Presiding Judge)