beta
Text
1. On May 12, 201, the Defendant’s second part regarding value-added tax for the second half-year portion on Company B on May 12, 2011.
Reasons
1. Details of the disposition;
A. B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant company”) was located in the five floors of Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government C building and was engaged in service business and content entertainment business on June 1, 2009 and closed on December 29, 2010.
B. The plaintiff is registered as the only internal director in the register of the company of this case, and the register of the company of this case does not state any matters concerning officers other than that concerning the company of this case.
C. The instant company did not pay the value-added tax after filing the return on February 2010, and the Defendant paid the instant company KRW 640,318,000 of value-added tax on March 7, 201 with the payment period as of March 31, 201, but did not pay it.
The Defendant deemed that the instant company was delinquent in national taxes and cannot cover national taxes, additional dues and disposition fees for arrears with the company’s property, and thus, the Plaintiff was the representative director of the instant company and 100% of its shares as the secondary taxpayer under Article 39 of the Framework Act on National Taxes, and thus, the Plaintiff was designated as the secondary taxpayer of the instant company. On May 12, 2011, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the payment of the amount of delinquent taxes equivalent to the value-added tax of KRW 651,571,340 (hereinafter “instant disposition”).
E. On October 28, 2013, the Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition, filed a lawsuit seeking confirmation of invalidity of the instant disposition.
[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 5, 11, Eul evidence 1 through 3, purport of whole pleadings]
2. The assertion and judgment
A. Although the Plaintiff’s assertion is registered as an internal director of the instant company, the instant company is a member of the “E group” controlled by Nonparty D as the president, and the Plaintiff actually operates the instant company’s business, a part of the E group.