beta
Case Number of the immediately preceding lawsuit
Seoul Western District Court-2014-Gohap-39602 ( October 11, 2015)
Title
Where collection of claims of a delinquent taxpayer in subrogation of the delinquent taxpayer under Article 41 (1) of the National Tax Collection Act is not required as the requirement for the insolvency of the delinquent taxpayer.
Summary
(1) The seizure of claims under Article 41 of the National Tax Collection Act (as stated in the judgment of the first instance) prohibits all acts of disposal, such as repayment, collection, etc. concerning claims, and makes it possible to collect claims on behalf of the defaulted taxpayer. Thus, the collection of claims of the defaulted taxpayer on behalf of the defaulted taxpayer under Article 41(1) of the National Tax Collection Act does not require the defaulted of
Related statutes
Article 41 (Procedures for Attachment of Claims)
Cases
2015Na203791 Collection
Plaintiff, Appellant
Korea
Defendant, appellant and appellant
AA Construction Corporation
Judgment of the first instance court
Seoul Western District Court Decision 2014Gahap39602 Decided June 11, 2015
Conclusion of Pleadings
November 18, 2015
Imposition of Judgment
January 8, 2016
Text
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1. Purport of claim
The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 103,763,490 won with 20% interest per annum from November 29, 2014 to the day of complete payment.
2. Purport of appeal
The part of the judgment of the first instance against the defendant shall be revoked, and the plaintiff's claim corresponding to the above revocation shall be dismissed.
Reasons
1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;
This court's explanation on this case is identical to the reasoning of the first instance court's decision, since it added "No. 7 with attached evidence" to No. 6, No. 10 of the judgment of the court of first instance, and therefore, it refers to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Conclusion
Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable within the above scope of recognition, and the remaining claims are dismissed as there is no ground. The judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.