Release of Attachment on Real Estate

The attachment is claimed on the ground that the comprehensive income tax was already paid, but the delinquent tax amount related to the attachment exists separately.

The contents of the decision shall be the same as attached.

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The plaintiff shall bear the litigation costs.

On July 1, 2009, the Defendant rendered a disposition of refusal to cancel the attachment on the 00 ○○○○-dong 95 large 60 square meters and the 95-1 large 72 square meters and the 95-1 large 72 square meters.

1. Circumstances of the disposition;

A. The plaintiff is a person who served as a representative director of Maridong Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Maridong"), from April 15, 1998 to December 31, 2001.

B. On May 7, 2003, the Defendant: (a) disposed of the income amount of KRW 66,830,000, 143,829,000, which was omitted from a report on sales for each business year of 1999 while the Plaintiff in office as the representative director of △△ in 198; and (b) disposed of the income amount of KRW 12,81,080, which was recognized as the representative director in 198; and (c) imposed the Plaintiff each aggregate income tax of KRW 22,083,670, which was reverted to 1999; and (d) on March 25, 2004, the Defendant seized the instant real estate by dividing it into real estate recorded in the intent of the claim on May 1, 2007, which was owned by ○○○○○95 site (hereinafter referred to as “the instant real estate”).

C. On June 21, 2004, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking the revocation of the disposition imposing global income tax as the Chuncheon District Court 2004Guhap1153, but was dismissed on October 6, 2005, and the Seoul High Court 2005Nu26214, which appealed on September 7, 2007, but was dismissed on September 7, 2007. The Plaintiff appealed by the Supreme Court 2007Du20973, but the said judgment of the first instance court became final and conclusive on December 27, 2007.

D. On June 19, 2009, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant to release the attachment of the instant real estate, but the Defendant rejected the application on July 1, 2009 on the ground that the Plaintiff’s global income tax in arrears exists and there is no ground to release the attachment under Article 53 of the National Tax Collection Act (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Reasons for Recognition] Evidence Nos. 1 through 5, Eul's entries in subparagraphs 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

Although the Defendant seized the instant real estate on the ground that the Plaintiff failed to pay the global income tax from 1998 to 2001, the global income tax in 198 and 1999 was already paid to the Plaintiff, and the disposition of global income tax in 2000 and 2001 was revoked, the attachment of the instant real estate should be revoked. Therefore, the Defendant’s disposition of refusing the Plaintiff’s request for cancellation of attachment is unlawful and thus, the disposition of this case should be revoked.

(b) Related statutes;

It is as shown in the attached Form.

C. Determination

According to the overall purport of the statements and arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 2, Eul evidence Nos. 2, Eul evidence Nos. 4 and 5 among Eul evidence Nos. 3, and the whole purport of the arguments, the attachment report with respect to the real estate of this case prepared as of July 28, 2009 is indicated as global income tax of 14,205,860 won for the year 1998 as of principal tax, and 19,627,280 won for the year 1999 as of principal tax, and 14,205,860 won for the year 200, 209, and 6,129,330 won for the year 200, 200, and 2001 as of the defendant's tax notice, the amount of delinquent tax imposed on the real estate of this case was already revoked for the year 198, 1980 won for the year 209, 1980 won for the year 190.

However, it has proposed administrative litigation to revoke the detailed disposition of the plaintiff's global income and the global income tax.

A. The facts that the judgment against the Plaintiff became final and conclusive are as seen earlier, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge that the Plaintiff paid the above delinquent amount or met the grounds for cancellation of attachment under Article 53 of the National Tax Collection Act. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the Plaintiff paid all the global income tax belonging to 1998 and 1999 (On the other hand, the Plaintiff’s assertion that all the global income tax belonging to 1998 and 7 evidence were paid, but according to each of 1 and 2 of 6 and 7 evidence, the global income tax belonging to 198 and 1999 paid by the Plaintiff was due on July 31, 202, with the payment deadline for global income tax belonging to 1998,650,670 won belonging to global income tax belonging to 1999, global income tax belonging to 199, global income tax belonging to 2,028,060 won, which is separate from the above real estate seizure tax as seen earlier.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so ordered as per Disposition.

partnership.