1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation on this part is as follows: “C. The Defendant made a ruling of approval on August 18, 2010 on the Plaintiff’s return after the deadline for the transfer income tax as of August 17, 2010 and notified the Plaintiff of the decision that there was no notified amount of transfer income tax,” among the part on the “1 disposition process” of the judgment of the court of first instance (the second-class 3-class 8) (the second-class 3-class 8 of the second-class 3), and other parts, “C. The Defendant made a ruling of approval on the Plaintiff’s return after the deadline for the transfer income tax as of August 17, 2010, and notified the Plaintiff of the fact that there was no notified amount of transfer income tax (the above ruling was referred to as the “instant disposition”). As such, it is identical to the part on the details of the above disposition, it shall be cited pursuant to Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. If an administrative disposition is revoked as to the legitimacy of the lawsuit of this case, such disposition is null and void, and no longer exists, and a revocation lawsuit against a non-existent administrative disposition is unlawful as there is no benefit of lawsuit.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Du16879, Apr. 29, 2010). According to the evidence Nos. 2 and 3, the Defendant’s revocation of the instant disposition ex officio on March 12, 2015, where the litigation is pending in the court of a trial. According to the above facts, according to the above facts, the instant lawsuit was already extinguished and the claim for revocation of a disposition without the extinguishment thereof was made illegal as there was no interest in the lawsuit.

3. Thus, the lawsuit of this case is dismissed as unlawful, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just in its conclusion, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition with regard to the burden of litigation costs borne by the defendant under Article 32 of the Administrative Litigation Act.