No administrative litigation may be instituted without going through the procedure of the preceding trial.

Administrative litigation against any illegal or unreasonable disposition, etc., which is a disposition under the Framework Act on National Taxes or tax-related Acts, shall not be filed without making a request for examination or adjudgment and making a decision thereon.

Article 55 of the Framework Act on National Taxes, Article 56 of the Framework Act

2013Guhap16727 The revocation of attachment disposition

Gangwon ○

○○ Head of tax office

October 28, 2014

November 18, 2014

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Cheong-gu Office

On August 3, 2013, the attachment disposition against the Plaintiff on the ○○○○○ Account (Account Number 000-00-000-000) set out by the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff, and the third obligor ○○○○○○○○○○○ is revoked.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff’s global income tax amounting to KRW 0,00,000,00 for the first time in 198 as indicated below, as follows:

The total amount of global income tax and value-added tax of KRW 00,000,000 (hereinafter referred to as "the national tax of this case") was delinquent.

B. On August 3, 2013, the Defendant issued a seizure disposition on the Plaintiff’s general deposit account (Account Number 000-00-000-000) in the Plaintiff’s name on the basis of the instant national tax credit (hereinafter “instant seizure disposition”).

C. On October 15, 2013, the Defendant released the instant attachment disposition ex officio.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, 3, Eul evidence 1, Eul evidence 6-4, the purport of whole pleadings]

2. The plaintiff's assertion

Since the right to collect national taxes of this case had already expired five years since the statute of limitations under Article 27 (1) 2 of the Framework Act on National Taxes at the time of the disposition of seizure of this case, the seizure disposition of this case for the purpose of collecting national taxes of this case is unlawful.

3. Determination on this safety defense

The defendant's lawsuit of this case does not go through the previous trial procedure or is already cancelled and effective.

The object of the lost disposition is an unlawful defense.

Articles 55 and 56(2) of the Framework Act on National Taxes provide that any administrative litigation against any illegal or unreasonable disposition, etc., as a disposition under the Framework Act on National Taxes, may not be filed without going through a request for examination or adjudgment under the Framework Act on National Taxes and a decision thereon. Article 2 subparag. 2 of the Framework Act on National Taxes provides that "tax-related Acts" refers to the law that provides the items and rates of national taxes, the National Tax Collection Act, the Restriction of Special Taxation Act, the Adjustment of International Taxes Act, the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act and the Procedure for the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act, and the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act, and Article 24(1) of the National Tax Collection Act provides that where a taxpayer fails to pay in full national taxes and additional dues by the designated time limit after receiving a notice of demand (including a notice of demand), the seizure disposition in this case is a disposition on default under the National Tax Collection Act for the reason of the Plaintiff's default of national taxes in this case, and it shall undergo a request for examination or adjudgment under the Framework Act on National Taxes.

Furthermore, as seen earlier, the Defendant’s revocation of the instant attachment disposition is identical to that of the instant lawsuit seeking revocation thereof, and is unlawful as there is no benefit of lawsuit as to the attachment disposition whose validity is extinguished (see Supreme Court Decision 2012Du6995, Jul. 12, 2012).

Therefore, the lawsuit of this case does not go through the necessary pre-trial procedure or does not have any interest in the lawsuit, and it is deemed to be a single part or illegal, and the defendant's defense of this case is with merit.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, since the lawsuit of this case is unlawful, it is decided to dismiss it. It is so decided as per Disposition.